While US Airways has backed off making cheap tickets "non-qualifying for status miles", I was wondering what their next plan of attack?

With business changing buying habits and using more non-refundable tickets (perhaps permanently), business travelers yield (revenue per mile) has dropped significantly.

With a primary objective of raising yield, the policy of non-qualifying for status miles is a way to encourage frequent flyers to buy more expensive tickets. This was met with a firestorm of protest and was rescinded.

However, my guess is that the airlines will try to meet the same objective in the following manner;

Raise Status levels;

Silver Preferred 25k to 35k
Gold Preferred 50k to 75k
Chairman Preferred 100k to 150k

Along with raising status levels, add a status miles bonus for higher priced tickets. For example;

Tickets in "H, K, V, Q and L" nonrefundable fare classes will receive actual status miles. Tickets in “B, M” fare classes will receive a 50% bonus in status miles.
Tickets in “Y” fare class will receive a 100% bonus in status miles.
Tickets in “C or F” fare class will receive a 200% bonus in status miles.

This will serve the purpose of encouraging full fare flyers (reaching status levels is easier) while discouraging discount flyers (with higher thresholds).

The recent non-status miles fiasco may have been a clumsy, first, attempt to increase yield. I’m sure it is not the last.


[This message has been edited by PBAudit (edited 09-11-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PBAudit:
While US Airways has backed off making cheap tickets "non-qualifying for status miles", I was wondering what their next plan of attack?</font>

It will be some continuing variation of increasingly arcane, bizzare and byzantine rules and restrictions.

It does not appear that it will ever occur to anyone in the Crystal Palace that simplifying things would actually spur people to travel.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">However, my guess is that the airlines will try to meet the same objective in the following manner...</font>

That certainly meets my "arcane, bizzare and byzantine" criteria.

Like everything else they've tried in that direction it will fail. The assumption that rewarding individuals will significantly change corporate behavior is false. You cannot justify flying a particular airline or buying a particular class of ticket on the basis of "I get more miles" if the cost to do so is significantly more than the cost of the alternatives.


[This message has been edited by TomBascom (edited 09-12-2002).]

It's kind of like HOV lanes. While the rest of the traffic is stopped, they neve seem to have many cars in them. Old habits die hard.

I expect they will do something as outlined above. While it seems draconian, it would be more fair to those who really pay for flights.

One other thing to realize is some airlines' top elite levels are 75k, not 100k. So if CO were to keep their top at 75k, and US raised it to 125k, it would lead some people at the margin to move their business to CO (even if their flight profiles would let them requal at 125k).

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by PBAudit:
While US Airways has backed off making cheap tickets "non-qualifying for status miles", I was wondering what their next plan of attack?
[This message has been edited by PBAudit (edited 09-11-2002).]</font>

See my post of regarding the change in systemwide upgrade coupons. I don't know if its new and I just missed the memo but it is definately news to me.

The rules now posted are incredible to read (this from a STL-LGA K fare)...

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">CANCELLATIONS TICKET IS NON-REFUNDABLE. NOTE - I. FARES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNTIL A TICKET IS PURCHASED. II. IF ANY PART OF THE TICKET IS UNUSED IT HAS NO VALUE AFTER TICKETED DEPARTURE TIME. EXCEPT- CUSTOMER COMMITMENT WILL APPLY-PSGR MAY CANCEL A TICKET PURCHASED WITHOUT PENALTY WITHIN 24 HOURS OF MAKING INITIAL RESERVATION. III. NO WAIVERS PERMITTED CHANGES CHARGE USD 100.00 FOR REISSUE. NOTE - I. PRIOR TO TICKETED DEPARTURE TIME- CHANGES ARE PERMITTED-USD 100.00 CHANGE FEE APPLIES. A. ANY CHANGE TO OUTBOUND FLT OR CHANGE IN CITY PAIRS REQ REPRICING OF CHANGED PORTION OFTKT. DIFFERENCE IN FARES PLUS THE CHNG FEE MUST BE PAID. IF THE NEW FARE RESULTS IN A LOWER PRICE THE DIFFERENCE IN FARES LESS THE CHNG FEE WILL BE GIVEN IN A NONREFUNDABLE VOUCHER VALID FOR TRAVEL ON US AIRWAYS. B. CHANGES TO OTHER THAN ORIGINATING FLT ARE PERMITTED WITH PAYMENT OF THE CHNG FEE ONLY IF ORIGINAL BOOKING CODE IS AVAILABLE AND ALL RULES OF THE FARE ARE MET. 1. IF NEW TRAVEL DOES NOT MEET ALL QUALIFICATIONS - REPRICE CHANGED PORTION OF TICKET. DIFFERENCE IN FARES PLUS THE THE CHANGE FEE MUST BE PAID. IF THIS CHANGE IS MADE BEFORE THE OUTBOUND FLIGHT AND THE NEW FARE RESULTS IN A LOWER PRICE THE DIFFERENCE IN FARES LESS THE CHANGE FEE WILL BE GIVEN IN A NONREFUNDABLE VOUCHER FOR TRAVEL ON US AIRWAYS. OTHERWISE THE NEW FARE MUST BE OR EQUAL OR GREATER VALUE. CHANGING FROM ONE WAY FARES TO ROUND TRIP FARES IS NOT PERMITTED ONCE TRAVEL BEGINS. C. IF THIS TKT HAS MORE THAN ONE TYPE OF FARE THE MORE RESTRICTIVE RULES APPLY TO THE ENTIRE TKT AND THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE NEW TKT IS NON-REF. D. TKT MUST BE REISSUED - CHANGE FEE AND ANY ADDITIONAL FARE MUST BE PAID AT TIME OF CHANGE. TRAVEL AGENCIES ONLY-IF PAPER TKT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR REISSUE- A/ REBOOK AND CALL US AIRWAYS FOR ASSISTANCE- OR B/ REBOOK AND ADD SSR OTHS CONTAINING NEW FARE AND CHANGE FEE INFO--REFER TO DRS KEYWORD -BOOKING- FOR DETAILS. E. FOR TRAVEL ON/AFT JANUARY 01 2003 A USD 100.00 SERVICE FEE ON THESE FARES WILL APPLY FOR STANDBY TRAVEL ON TICKETED DAY OF DEPARTURE. ALL FARE RULES MUST BE MET INCLUDING FLIGHT AND TIME SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. I. AFTER EACH TICKETED DEPARTURE TIME- NO CHANGES PERMITTED- TICKET HAS NO VALUE. II SAME DAY STANDBY NOT PERMITTED FOR FARES HAVING NO VALUE. III. NO WAIVERS PERMITTED</font>

Insane!!

Just a follow-up thought on my above post. Has US Airways, or any of the majors for that matter, put any thought whatsoever into the total annual man hours required to conceive, structure, interpret, enforce, etc. these rediculous rules?? Who hasn't been stuck in a check-in line waiting while an agent reads through X pages of rules trying to figure out the arcane rules? Or how about hours on the phone with an agent trying to construct something that doesn't violate the rules?

I might be willing to stick my neck out and say that simplifying fare buckets and rules and accepting the potential downgrade in average fares paid might be more than offset by efficiencies? Not to mention more satisfied customers and employees? Oye! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TomBascom:
... It does not appear that it will ever occur to anyone in the Crystal Palace that simplifying things would actually spur people to travel. ... </font>

Not to mention the fact that it would probably streamline their own distribution/reissue process resulting in lower costs and freeing up a reservation agent's time to actually sell more tickets.

OTOH, streamlining one's process to achieve efficiency is a lot harder than simply "raising" your price.

Just one of the many reasons WN keeps eating the major carriers' lunch. Rather than work to simplify things, the traditional carriers get more complicated.

As for what US may/can/should do to encourage more full fare flying: Why not adopt AA's approach of counting "points" that reflect price paid (.5 for discouny coach;1.00 for full coach; 1.25 for business; 1.5 for first) and using these as an ADDITIONAL way for high value customers to get too Silver/Gold/CP without flying 25K/50K/100K. So, a customer who does 17,000 in full first gets Silver (17,000+8,500=25,500); gets Gold for 34,000; and CP for 67,000.

Also, look for fewer free seats at the planaahead (25K) level- forcing people to shell out twice as many miles for a free ticket. They'll still make the 25K award an option- you'll just only be able to get it to places like Buffalo in January; or Phoenix in August.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by hscottm:
I expect they will do something as outlined above. While it seems draconian, it would be more fair to those who really pay for flights.</font>

I assume you meant "pay more"?

Those who pay full fares already have all the advantages that reducing the ranks of elites would bring. They get automatic upgrades without being subject to the windows and they jump right over us peons waiting for G inventory to magically appear. Unless you think that having most of F empty so that the airline will be tempted to remove it for lack of use is an advantage?

Even if US did do something like raise the levels or reinstate Black Tuesday's preferred miles fiasco -- it wouldn't take effect until March of 2004! What, exactly, does that do to help this supposed overcrowding of the elite tiers? Right, it does nothing. It was either incredibly badly thought out or it was a deliberate feint.


[This message has been edited by TomBascom (edited 09-12-2002).]

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">I might be willing to stick my neck out and say that simplifying fare buckets and rules and accepting the potential downgrade in average fares paid might be more than offset by efficiencies? Not to mention more satisfied customers and employees? Oye! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif</font>

Quite frankly I think that the average fare in such a scenario would increase. As it is I don't even look at the unrestricted tickets. I know that they are so far out of reach that there is no point. They're a joke. The only time I ever buy them is when they are all that exists for that market (PHL...)

But if all the crap was eliminated and the chasm between an inflexible (as in the pre 8/27 sorts of rules but kinder, gentler and understandable by everyone -- not the new draconian stuff) discount ticket and a more flexible/advantageous "business" ticket were to be more reasonable I'd be happy to pay another $100 or so for some identifiable value. I'll bet a lot of corporate travel offices would be too.

[This message has been edited by TomBascom (edited 09-12-2002).]