United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - UA 1k SWU benefit - Any chance of matching AAs 8?

Does anyone think there is any chance that UA will match the 8 SWUs that AA 100,000 mile flyers receive in the 2013 iteration of MilagePlus?

I like UA, but those two additional SWUs add a LOT of benefit to AAs FF program. (I won't even mention that the AA SWUs are valid on any fare; I'd just be happy to see 8 instead of 6...)

I like UA, but those two additional SWUs add a LOT of benefit to AAs FF program. (I won't even mention that the AA SWUs are valid on any fare; I'd just be happy to see 8 instead of 6...)

Can't comment on if UA will make any changes, but for me I'd rather keep the current number of SWUs and have the fare restriction removed.

Can't comment on if UA will make any changes, but for me I'd rather keep the current number of SWUs and have the fare restriction removed.
Yup, totally agree. I'd be happy with only 4 SWUs if they'd just remove the fare restriction.

Can't comment on if UA will make any changes, but for me I'd rather keep the current number of SWUs and have the fare restriction removed.

Yup, totally agree. I'd be happy with only 4 SWUs if they'd just remove the fare restriction.

Wow... you guys must be domestic flyers. Exactly the opposite with me. The price difference between K/L and W is not that much--always under $500 and sometimes $200--on the routes I fly. I would MUCH rather have 8 restricted SWUs than 6 unrestricted ones.

Does anyone think there is any chance that UA will match the 8 SWUs that AA 100,000 mile flyers receive in the 2013 iteration of MilagePlus?

I like UA, but those two additional SWUs add a LOT of benefit to AAs FF program. (I won't even mention that the AA SWUs are valid on any fare; I'd just be happy to see 8 instead of 6...)

Absolutely no chance, unless somehow the number of folks defecting from UA to AA somehow changes UA management's entire perspective on MP. But that's highly unlikely and the definite trend at UA is certainly in the opposite direction.

Sad to say, much more likely that we'll see continued dilution of the MP program in coming years rather than the enhancement you have in mind.

I would MUCH rather have 8 restricted SWUs than 6 unrestricted ones.

+1

it'd be nice if they refunded the difference between W - [lowest fare at time of booking] if it doesn't clear, but honestly my GPU rate has been 100% so far even if it does cut down to the wire, so my experience is a little different. haven't felt the burn yet.

Does anyone think there is any chance that UA will match the 8 SWUs that AA 100,000 mile flyers receive in the 2013 iteration of MilagePlus?

I like UA, but those two additional SWUs add a LOT of benefit to AAs FF program. (I won't even mention that the AA SWUs are valid on any fare; I'd just be happy to see 8 instead of 6...)This differential has existed since the beginning of time... I don't see any reason why UA would suddenly choose to match it now.

Hasn't AA always given 8 (at least the last several years)?

If UA hasn't "matched" by now, I see no reason why they would start.

SEA1K4EVR GMTA ^ (although you are a minute quicker mind :eek:)

Keep in mind that a single one of UA's SWUs is valid for a connecting itinerary - e g LHR-SFO-SYD. Not that AA flies to Sydney, but if you were flying LHR-MIA-SCL you'd need to use two SWUs.

But yes, removing the fare class restriction would make a world of difference. The combination of (1) increasing the price differential for booking class W, (2) decreasing the number of seats confirmable in advance, (3) making it a total lottery whether your position on the waitlist disappears (and cannot be reinstated) at T-24 or not, and (4) charging the airport tax differential has completely removed any reason to prefer UA's 100k level over AA's. Six or eight barely matters anymore - I'm rapidly moving from not enough SWUs to more than I can use.

Hasn't AA always given 8 (at least the last several years)?

If UA hasn't "matched" by now, I see no reason why they would start.

Because of the supposed large number of defectors.

+1

it'd be nice if they refunded the difference between W - [lowest fare at time of booking] if it doesn't clear.

Yep.. that's the crappy part of this scheme.



but honestly my GPU rate has been 100% so far even if it does cut down to the wire, so my experience is a little different. haven't felt the burn yet.

Me too. Although the BKK-NRT portion of my (late) August flight only has 4 C seats left and I haven't been upgraded yet, so that segment isn't looking good at this point. (NRT-ORD has already cleared.)

Keep in mind that a single one of UA's SWUs is valid for a connecting itinerary - e g LHR-SFO-SYD. Not that AA flies to Sydney, but if you were flying LHR-MIA-SCL you'd need to use two SWUs.

I didn't know that! Thanks, that makes a HUGE difference as I ALWAYS use them for TPA-ORD-NRT-BKK. I always get F in TPA-ORD regardless, but ORD-NRT and NRT-BKK are both long flights with nice C seats. I guess UAs 6 are better in my case then. The value of the knowledge on this site is immeasurable sometimes.


But yes, removing the fare class restriction would make a world of difference. The combination of (1) increasing the price differential for booking class W, (2) decreasing the number of seats confirmable in advance, (3) making it a total lottery whether your position on the waitlist disappears (and cannot be reinstated) at T-24 or not, and (4) charging the airport tax differential has completely removed any reason to prefer UA's 100k level over AA's. Six or eight barely matters anymore - I'm rapidly moving from not enough SWUs to more than I can use.

I find the price differential to be minimal, but can you explain what you mean in (3) and (4)?

Wow... you guys must be domestic flyers. Exactly the opposite with me. The price difference between K/L and W is not that much--always under $500 and sometimes $200--on the routes I fly. I would MUCH rather have 8 restricted SWUs than 6 unrestricted ones.

I found this to be true under PMUA, but after 3/3 Im finding the difference to get the 'W' to be close to if not over $1000. Then COdbaUA isnt allowing that many confirmations at time of tkting so you have to play COs game , Well Punk do you think this is your lucky Itin and that you will eventually clear. Otherwise you just overpaid to sit in that exact same Coach seat.

I NEVER played that game nor will I ever do so unless its at max an extra $100 for the 'W' fare

Yup, totally agree. I'd be happy with only 4 SWUs if they'd just remove the fare restriction.

Agree the fare restrictions should be aligned similar to AA - but definitely not be reducing it down to 4! NO WAY!!!
This would make a move over to AA even easier.

Because of the supposed large number of defectors.

"Supposed" is a very liberal term (we have heard all sorts of defector numbers bounced around here), IMhO, for every AA match defector, there were probably just as many who left AA when the BK was announced.

Matches and poaching happen all the time, recent UA history suggests the "old days" of giving the sun, moon and stars to retain elites are over.

I found this to be true under PMUA, but after 3/3 Im finding the difference to get the 'W' to be close to if not over $1000. Then COdbaUA isnt allowing that many confirmations at time of tkting so you have to play COs game , Well Punk do you think this is your lucky Itin and that you will eventually clear. Otherwise you just overpaid to sit in that exact same Coach seat.

I NEVER played that game nor will I ever do so unless its at max an extra $100 for the 'W' fare

Sorry to hear that. I booked a TPA-BKK last month and the fare difference was $2xx. The transpac flights seem to always clear midweek. But it does suck that they are basically running a lottery even if the odds of winning are pretty high.

"Supposed" is a very liberal term (we have heard all sorts of defector numbers bounced around here), IMhO, for every AA match defector, there were probably just as many who left AA when the BK was announced.


What is BK? Burger King meals in C? :p

...after 3/3 Im finding the difference to get the 'W' to be close to if not over $1000. ... there is not an universally true statement possible for this since this is route and booking time dependent. USA-Asia seem to higher than USA-Europe. For 60-90 days out this summer / fall for West Coast to Europe, the delta from T/S to W has been $100 or so. While NRT looks like $200-$300 for another example.

Does anyone think there is any chance that UA will match the 8 SWUs that AA 100,000 mile flyers receive in the 2013 iteration of MilagePlus?

Because of the supposed large number of defectors.

When hell freezes over or Jeff finally bails with his golden parachute.

Seriously, the newUA has consistently shown post 3/3 they simply do not care what AA does or if UA elite leaves or not. The SWU's will now always be the bottom of the barrel as a way to UG international. Money and $+miles will be the preferred UG instrument with the newUA, period!

What is BK? Burger King meals in C? :p

Ch 11 Bankruptcy

Keep in mind that a single one of UA's SWUs is valid for a connecting itinerary - e g LHR-SFO-SYD. Not that AA flies to Sydney, but if you were flying LHR-MIA-SCL you'd need to use two SWUs.

This is not true...AA SWUs are valid for a one way trip on AA metal with up to 3 segments.

UA will not match anyone, will not credit fare differences if GPU fails, will not offer anything tangible to their top MP members. UA will, however take away as much as it possible can and reduce benefits as much as possible. Loyalty means nothing to them any longer. Since 3/3 little has gone right, but not one tiny little offer of good will from UA has been generated. But like the ad I see prominently displayed right now on top and on the right, it's the United Mileage Plus Explorer card "You're in". Yes they are, but we true FFers are out.

Since 3/3 little has gone right, but not one tiny little offer of good will from UA has been generated.

I was wondering about that as well. Then again, maybe they'll show some respect/understanding once things have been fixed. Not knowing what might still go wrong / crash on UA FFs, they might want to avoid having to come back with a token of appreciation 2x, or 3x or .....?

Keep in mind that a single one of UA's SWUs is valid for a connecting itinerary - e g LHR-SFO-SYD. Not that AA flies to Sydney, but if you were flying LHR-MIA-SCL you'd need to use two SWUs.


You are dead wrong. I have done (using one EVIP) NRT-JFK-LHR and NRT-JFK-GIG too numerous times to count.

:(:(:(

What is BK? Burger King meals in C? :p

BK= Bankruptcy

@:-)@:-)

I didn't know that! Thanks, that makes a HUGE difference as I ALWAYS use them for TPA-ORD-NRT-BKK. I always get F in TPA-ORD regardless, but ORD-NRT and NRT-BKK are both long flights with nice C seats. I guess UAs 6 are better in my case then. The value of the knowledge on this site is immeasurable sometimes.

This is not true...AA SWUs are valid for a one way trip on AA metal with up to 3 segments.

I stand corrected! Which goes to show that what you pick up on FT isn't *always* true! But it's still correct that UA allows this, too, and I'm glad we were able to enlighten the OP about this. And unfortunately it strenghtens my argument that UA's SWU program has no edge whatsoever anymore.

I find the price differential to be minimal, but can you explain what you mean in (3) and (4)?

(3) Unfortunately, literally what I said. At T-24, new requests to apply SWUs can no longer be accepted, and a wait list is created. Unfortunately, ever since 3/3, your SWU request may or may not be transferred to this list, depending on the quirks of SHARES. In my experience, if this does not happen, many UA agents are unable to put you back on there. I've even had the experience of an agent who, after struggling one hour to check me and my travel companion in, had to tell me that the only way she was able to check us in and get us underway was to *remove* the upgrade request. Some agents who are both experienced with SHARES and of a customer-friendly mindset (these do not always go together) are able to reinstate you, but you've lost the priority of the time stamp reflecting when your upgrade was originally requested.

(4) Until this year, UA would pick up the tax liability connected with moving you into a premium class. Ex-UK, this is quite substantial, and it was a very nice feature of the pmUA system that they didn't collect it from you. Maybe they hadn't figured out how to program their system to do it, or maybe it was deemed a fair quid pro quo for you having booked a more expensive W fare. Well, now they do collect it, out of airports where it is substantial enough (again, such as UK airports). This removes the last advantage over AA's SWU, with the added disadvantage that AA will collect the tax only if and when your upgrade clears, whereas UA will collect it when you request your upgrade and leave you to fight for them to recredit the money if it doesn't clear.

I(3) Unfortunately, literally what I said. At T-24, new requests to apply SWUs can no longer be accepted, and a wait list is created. Unfortunately, ever since 3/3, your SWU request may or may not be transferred to this list, depending on the quirks of SHARES. In my experience, if this does not happen, many UA agents are unable to put you back on there. I've even had the experience of an agent who, after struggling one hour to check me and my travel companion in, had to tell me that the only way she was able to check us in and get us underway was to *remove* the upgrade request. Some agents who are both experienced with SHARES and of a customer-friendly mindset (these do not always go together) are able to reinstate you, but you've lost the priority of the time stamp reflecting when your upgrade was originally requested.

Not entirely correct - inside T-24, if R>0, an upgrade instrument newly applied will clear right away (have to call it in).

But it is a total CF now it seems to get moved to the waitlist if R=0.

You are dead wrong. I have done (using one EVIP) NRT-JFK-LHR and NRT-JFK-GIG too numerous times to count.

:(:(:(

Yes, thank you Mr Embassador, this was pointed out a few posts earlier.

Not entirely correct - inside T-24, if R>0, an upgrade instrument newly applied will clear right away (have to call it in).

But it is a total CF now it seems to get moved to the waitlist if R=0.

Yes, but you'll have to convince the agent that it's newly applied when it was actually applied months ago. There is a way to move you to the waitlist with T>24 h and R=0. Took three UC agents to figure it out, I'm kicking myself for not writing down the command. Mind, upgrade didn't clear anyway as the priority was lost.

Of all the things people are disgruntled with enough to move from UA to AA, the number of SWUs seems to be pretty low on the list of reasons.

I stand corrected! Which goes to show that what you pick up on FT isn't *always* true! But it's still correct that UA allows this, too, and I'm glad we were able to enlighten the OP about this. And unfortunately it strenghtens my argument that UA's SWU program has no edge whatsoever anymore.





Were on FT are they saying it is only one segment for AA SWU's? You are EXP so I am surprised you didnt know that already from personal experience and not from reading about it on FT.

With regars to the question at hand in this thread. I would be shocked if UA allowed their GPU's to be used on any fare. As others have mentioned that since they haven't done it yet then they probably wont. If they did, I would bet they would decrease the number of GPU's.

With regards to GPU's in general, they just dont have the value they used to. I had a recent trip to ZRH/BSL from IND that I was able to book on AA for $500 less than what it would have cost me for a UA ticket that would have allowed me to upgrade. This trip was for two people so $1000 total...no way I was booking with UA for the privilege to be in the queue. At least if I dont clear on AA I didnt lose out on money. Look at CC, people are having a hard time getting anything for UA GPU's.

Well as a GS who books premium international if I had one request it would be to make them work on Z fares. That would actually make them useful to me since as it stands if I don't want to play a lottery for an upgrade (and I don't) I just buy a biz ticket. Thing is though, that since I can buy that on any carrier it would actually be an incentive for UA purchases if I could potentially use a GPU on such a ticket.

"Supposed" is a very liberal term (we have heard all sorts of defector numbers bounced around here), IMhO, for every AA match defector, there were probably just as many who left AA when the BK was announced.
The numbers floating around from discussions with AA Execs was in the 5,000 range (active fliers who matched). I don't think this counts the number of corporate contracts who bailed on UA during that time.

As to the OP's question, No chance. I believe UA is trying to purge some of their ranks so they are in no rush to keep the overentitled 1k's that have left.

The tradeoff to this is AA might not offer the right routing via AA metal to certain locales that UA flies to. You can use UA SWU's on LH flights. You can't use the AA versions on anything but AA flights. This limits their usage. If AA made these usable across the other OW members, then that's a game changer.

This differential has existed since the beginning of time... I don't see any reason why UA would suddenly choose to match it now.

I think it's been 10 years or more since UA also gave us 8 SWU's. Doubt they will match but I would be happy keeping the W fare requirement if they did give us 8. I agree with the other poster - the difference on the fares I fly is typically $200-$250 from the minimum to a W fare - not horrible.

Were on FT are they saying it is only one segment for AA SWU's? You are EXP so I am surprised you didnt know that already from personal experience and not from reading about it on FT.

I'm a UA 1K and an AA EXP - I'm sure you can extrapolate how I got from one to the other if you try. I don't see the point in spending half an hour trying to search for my source - I was misinformed, which is good news for everybody except Smíšek.

I think it's been 10 years or more since UA also gave us 8 SWU's. Doubt they will match but I would be happy keeping the W fare requirement if they did give us 8. I agree with the other poster - the difference on the fares I fly is typically $200-$250 from the minimum to a W fare - not horrible.

I've been a 1K since 1998 and UA has never given more than 6 SWU's during that time..except for one year back in 2004 when they gave out 4 supplemental "Sweet Spot" SWU's good on any fare to make up for the fact that some bone head at UA decided to make the original 6 that year good only on H class fares and higher (to match mileage upgrades at the time). They were all paper back then so UA couldn't just change how eSWU's worked.

UA has always been 6 SWU's. AA gives 8, but they don't give out CR1's like UA does..so there's the trade off.

I think the bigger problem with UA's GPUs is that they post to your account when you reach 100k and expire one year later. I know so many people who hold off flying on UA just so they can get the GPUs later in the year. This is just an idiotic policy and only take away business from UA. If you already have 6 GPUs that you have not been able to use, what's the sense of getting 6 more that would overlap, to a certain extent, with the 6 you still have.

I know so many people who hold off flying on UA just so they can get the GPUs later in the year. This is just an idiotic policy and only take away business from UA.

While I agree, it was not a change for the better..... other then MR'ing (and the mirco amount of FT'ers), I don't think its accurate to say it takes away from UA's business. If travellers need to fly somewhere most (and I admit, I am generalizing too:eek:) just go without regard to when they cross 1K.

While I agree, it was not a change for the better..... other then MR'ing (and the mirco amount of FT'ers), I don't think its accurate to say it takes away from UA's business. If travellers need to fly somewhere most (and I admit, I am generalizing too:eek:) just go without regard to when they cross 1K.

I agree that travellers will have to travel but they can fly on another airline whereas before they would just fly United.

I'd rather have 4 SWUs I can use reliably than 6 where I have to pay the ridiculous lottery.

I don't care if I have to get W, I can suck it up to get W if I can get space to upgrade to. The problem is buying W and having no idea if you'll get the upgrade. Problem is that on routes I like to fly (especially TLV), CO doesn't release much upgrade space at all.

Problem is that on routes I like to fly (especially TLV), CO doesn't release much upgrade space at all.

You mean UA, operating aircraft proudly manned by CO crew?

The only way this would ever happen would be if UA took away something of greater value. For example, sure, we'll give you 8 GPUs, but now they only work for one segment on an itin.


Wow... you guys must be domestic flyers. Exactly the opposite with me. The price difference between K/L and W is not that much--always under $500 and sometimes $200--on the routes I fly. I would MUCH rather have 8 restricted SWUs than 6 unrestricted ones.

Depends on the route. I priced WAS-HKG earlier this year for a trip to visit a friend, and W was literally double the then-available L fare (and on some dates, more than double)--a delta of over $1000. Flights to Australia are also notoriously pricier to get W over the cheaper buckets.

UA has always been 6 SWU's. AA gives 8, but they don't give out CR1's like UA does..so there's the trade off.
To be fair also, you get UDU as an EXP on transcons (JFK-SFO) whereas you need to use CR1's on UA..

To be fair also, you get UDU as an EXP on transcons (JFK-SFO) whereas you need to use CR1's on UA..

My guess is it will change when the new three class A321's come in on AA

Well as a GS who books premium international if I had one request it would be to make them work on Z fares. That would actually make them useful to me since as it stands if I don't want to play a lottery for an upgrade (and I don't) I just buy a biz ticket. Thing is though, that since I can buy that on any carrier it would actually be an incentive for UA purchases if I could potentially use a GPU on such a ticket.

I can agree with this. Especially since the GF product IMO is only marginally better (and not available on many flights anyway).

there is not an universally true statement possible for this since this is route and booking time dependent. USA-Asia seem to higher than USA-Europe. For 60-90 days out this summer / fall for West Coast to Europe, the delta from T/S to W has been $100 or so. While NRT looks like $200-$300 for another example.

DEN > SYD (granted, it's winter) was a whopping $200 extra and I got F/BF cleared at booking for the entire journey. I have no issue with that at all. ^

Then again, as I've said multiple times -- if it doesn't clear at booking, I don't play the GPU lottery.

Cheers,
Adam

+1

it'd be nice if they refunded the difference between W - [lowest fare at time of booking] if it doesn't clear, but honestly my GPU rate has been 100% so far even if it does cut down to the wire, so my experience is a little different. haven't felt the burn yet.

My clearance rate this year has been 1 of 4. :(

W fare cleared.
B fare - cleared, but flight cancelled !!!! Routed and did not clear on re-routing.
W fare - did not clear
V fare - did not clear

I'm sitting on 5 GPU's, and may not travel much internationally for the rest of the year, so I do feel a bit burned, especially since the B fare thing - the flight gets cancelled! Sigh.

This is not true...AA SWUs are valid for a one way trip on AA metal with up to 3 segments.
I can confirm I've been able to use this up to 3 segments ( one way)

there is not an universally true statement possible for this since this is route and booking time dependent. USA-Asia seem to higher than USA-Europe. For 60-90 days out this summer / fall for West Coast to Europe, the delta from T/S to W has been $100 or so. While NRT looks like $200-$300 for another example.

SYD->east coast the fare difference is $1000 of late... (K->W)

Depends on the route. I priced WAS-HKG earlier this year for a trip to visit a friend, and W was literally double the then-available L fare (and on some dates, more than double)--a delta of over $1000. Flights to Australia are also notoriously pricier to get W over the cheaper buckets.

I'm currently seeing some NYC-Asia routes where K is $1200 and W is $2200. The same $1k delta.

SYD->east coast the fare difference is $1000 of late... (K->W)

I'm currently seeing some NYC-Asia routes where K is $1200 and W is $2200. The same $1k delta.

Don't think anyone is doubting the delta is appraching $1,000, but that it is not the norm for all routes.

It is interesting the wide range of deltas and wonder what competitive influences cause the difference?

I will admit I can understand the UA concerns with allowing GPUs with rock bottom L/K/G fares. It is interesting there is alot of international (less competitive?) routes that don't even offer L/K/G fares.

I'd be totally happy if they removed capacity controls for 1K and above with more than 1 Million Miles.:D

(3) Unfortunately, literally what I said. At T-24, new requests to apply SWUs can no longer be accepted, and a wait list is created. Unfortunately, ever since 3/3, your SWU request may or may not be transferred to this list, depending on the quirks of SHARES. In my experience, if this does not happen, many UA agents are unable to put you back on there. I've even had the experience of an agent who, after struggling one hour to check me and my travel companion in, had to tell me that the only way she was able to check us in and get us underway was to *remove* the upgrade request. Some agents who are both experienced with SHARES and of a customer-friendly mindset (these do not always go together) are able to reinstate you, but you've lost the priority of the time stamp reflecting when your upgrade was originally requested.

(4) Until this year, UA would pick up the tax liability connected with moving you into a premium class. Ex-UK, this is quite substantial, and it was a very nice feature of the pmUA system that they didn't collect it from you. Maybe they hadn't figured out how to program their system to do it, or maybe it was deemed a fair quid pro quo for you having booked a more expensive W fare. Well, now they do collect it, out of airports where it is substantial enough (again, such as UK airports). This removes the last advantage over AA's SWU, with the added disadvantage that AA will collect the tax only if and when your upgrade clears, whereas UA will collect it when you request your upgrade and leave you to fight for them to recredit the money if it doesn't clear.

OK, I see. I've never had a SWU go until T-24 so far. And I only use them for US-Asia flights, so I guess (4) doesn't apply to me (at least not significantly) then.

To be fair also, you get UDU as an EXP on transcons (JFK-SFO) whereas you need to use CR1's on UA..

CR1s are useless to me. My clearance rate on domestic flights is 100% and has been for years. No one pays for F from Tampa and apparently there are not many elites. Silvers get upgraded regularly. I always give regionals away.

I'm currently seeing some NYC-Asia routes where K is $1200 and W is $2200. The same $1k delta.
Looking at September flights ex PHX to NRT, K fare $ 945.00, W fare 2020.00 for an unbelievable difference of $ 1075.00, more than double and still no guarantee. Instead of playing the lottery game, booked myself on AA, lowest fare is $ 10.00 cheaper and I have exit seats which are still only two seat rows, nice to be with Mrs. EX and not worry about a seatmate. I am trying to retain my status with them and they do treat me very, very well, just like UA did many, many moons ago.

Looking at September flights ex PHX to NRT, K fare $ 945.00, W fare 2020.00 for an unbelievable difference of $ 1075.00, more than double and still no guarantee. Instead of playing the lottery game, booked myself on AA, lowest fare is $ 10.00 cheaper and I have exit seats which are still only two seat rows, nice to be with Mrs. EX and not worry about a seatmate. I am trying to retain my status with them and they do treat me very, very well, just like UA did many, many moons ago.

That's crazy and I don't blame you. But TPA-BKK in October has only a $250 difference at the moment, so not everyone is seeing these issues.

CR1s are useless to me. My clearance rate on domestic flights is 100% and has been for years. No one pays for F from Tampa and apparently there are not many elites. Silvers get upgraded regularly. I always give regionals away.
They are more useful for those that do transcons (JFK-LAX or JFK-SFO or vice versa).

It's understandable in your case if they aren't as useful given your flight patterns.