What happened

On September 10, Revio presented observations from 5,821 small-business loyalty cards over the period from September 2025 to September 2026. About 80% of the cards were issued in Egypt, with the remainder predominantly in Saudi Arabia and Gulf countries. The sample includes shops and service businesses. [1 · Revio]

What is known about effectiveness

Within 30 days, 34.2% of customers returned among those whose first visit had occurred at least a month before the calculation. Holders of 4.9% of cards received a reward. Active programs are included and deleted cards excluded. There is no control group: the figures describe participants' behavior but do not prove the program's own effect. [1 · Revio]

How to assess the result

For relationship marketing, database size should be supplemented by the share of second purchases, the interval between visits and profit after rewards. Comparisons should stay within one category and equal lengths of participation: the natural purchase frequency differs between a café and an electronics store. To test the program's contribution, consenting participants can be randomly assigned to groups using a new design or the previous terms. This regional benchmark should not be extended to the entire global market. [1 · Revio]

Expert commentary

The main value of Revio's publication is the opportunity to shift the loyalty discussion from database size to observed behavior. For an independent store, such a system can support regular work on repeat visits. However, I regard the results as a description of a specific set of cards. Turning these figures into a universal standard can lead to poor decisions, especially in categories where months naturally pass between purchases rather than days. [1 · Revio]

There is a fundamental difference between a person returning and a card being scanned again. If staff miss scans or one person uses several cards, the measurement will be biased; the presence of such errors in the sample has not been established. Excluding deleted cards and including only active programs further limits representativeness. The completeness of purchase recording should therefore be checked before differences in metrics are attributed to program quality or customer interest. [1 · Revio]

Research by Kivetz, Urminsky and Zheng explains a clear mechanism: activity in real reward programs increased as participants approached a reward. My recommendation follows from this: show an attainable goal and transparent progress. But a reasonable time to earn a bonus depends on the natural purchase frequency. Trying to make a salon visitor behave like a coffee shop customer may increase pressure and disappointment even if intermediate program metrics look better. [2 · Kivetz, Urminsky, Zheng, 2006]

Liu's study shows another important difference: the most active customers readily received rewards but did not necessarily change their behavior. Low reward redemption therefore cannot automatically be called failure, or high redemption success. For relationship marketing, it matters more to understand which groups began choosing the business more often and why. Different mechanisms are possible: thanking a regular customer, bringing back an occasional buyer, or simply subsidizing purchases that would have happened anyway. [3 · Liu, 2007]

For the market, the potential benefit is making relationship measurement accessible to small businesses; for local communities, it is supporting lasting connections with independent shops and services. At the same time, a digital card may become a barrier for someone who finds that method of participation inconvenient. In international expansion, I would retain an accessible alternative and examine its use. Regional behavior calls for local observation, not mechanical transfer of the Egyptian benchmark. [1 · Revio]

A new program design should be tested on groups with equal participation periods and similar initial visit frequency. I would measure incremental margin after rewards, time to the second purchase, return visits after the first reward and the share of customers who stop participating. The last stage is especially important: acceleration before a reward can be followed by a pause afterward, as Kivetz and coauthors observed. Lasting relationships appear in continued purchasing, not merely completion of the first reward card. [2 · Kivetz, Urminsky, Zheng, 2006]

Sources

  1. Revio — digital loyalty card study — September 10, 2026. The provider's own data and methodology description.
  2. Kivetz, Urminsky, Zheng, 2006 — proximity to rewards and repeat purchasing — Primary research with field experiments; recommendations are adapted to this event.
  3. Liu, 2007 — differences between customer groups — Primary longitudinal research; it does not evaluate Revio programs.