MilesBuzz! - Time for "Creative" FF programs!

Airline bean counters are faced with enormous "contingent" (potential) liabilities in the case of all those FF miles acquired by both business and "other" travelers. From the airlines standpoint, the liability problem is aggravated by the the majority of FF travelers attempting to use their miles want to fly to the most glamorous or busiest destinations, the ones with high fares (Every FF seat = lost revenues) or the fullest flights (Every FF seat = lost revenue). Their solution, "back*sswards" at best, has been to trim available seats and curtail the lifespan of miles.

Were I counting corporate beans these days (or sitting behind a desk labelled "Marketing" as I once did), my solution would be quick and almost painless....to induce folks to "burn up" their miles and the airlines' liability by filling seats unlikely to be sold. AA has always offered "cheaper" redemptions "off season" (Fall/Winter) to Europe. A smart bean counter carries that practice a double step forward, offering seats on flights with low load factors at deep discounts in points, filling empty seats for the modest cost of on board amenities. For years, premium seats into Milan on DL were far easier to get than those to/from Rome, and I'm sure that there are off season flights into some "Eurogateways" which take off with lower load factors.

As for domestic destinations, take your pick of many of the "medium" non-hub markets. All the down-sizing to RJs involved flights which couldn't fill larger a/c. For those of us who live in the US's "little spoke" airports, awards are even tougher. The Saab 340s here don't have many award seats, but with DFW 2:20 away and IAH only about 3 fours from my door, I'll drive that far for a "discounted" FF seat into an airport to which I would not normally fly.

From my perspective, the problem of the "legacies" and the negative reaction of long time and hitherto loyal patrons to perceived "loss" of FF benefits is a real lack of creativity by the airlines' Marketing Departments. The FF miles are there, and curtailing awards or trimming eligibility time frames are miserable solutions sure to generate hostility in an already semi-hostile environment. Far better for the legacies to find their empty seats (or the empty seats which may be cheaply available from their partners) and fill them with happy campers who feel they are getting a bargain!

(Admittedly copied from a response I made to a post on Frommers, but I think I'll get a better series of answers at FT...)

Some programs do just that. For example Air NZ Airpoints have airpoints dollars as currency, rather than miles. When redeeming on Air NZ ticketed and operated flights, can use airbucks instead of cash (whole fare only, not partially through airbucks) for any available seat. So the award cost automatically varies according to paid fare.

(Note NZ also has fixed amounts awards on partners, on Air NZ special business class awards for elite members, and for Air NZ upgrades.)

it is good to find and discuss solutions to these problems the airline majors are having. I still blame them though, because they sold miles and marketing schemas to all kinds of portals and it almost looks as though they did this knowing full well they have no intention on making good on the 'promises' of 'free' flights with said miles.

People who 'fall for' the vast array of marketing to the consumer and now wish to redeem for a free flight are finding it harder and harder to do so and the airlines keep coming up with excuses and blaming you and I for actually expecting to get a ticket to Vegas in high season or something like that. Well, that's what they are selling, so I say it either SHOULD be available or they should stop promoting it!

I would love it if the airlines would try to find whole new radical ways of handling this 'monster out of the cave' problem and to do it without having to impose further restrictions or fees on the very people they sell to. That's annoying and archaic. Time to move forward!

I had mentioned this in another thread and in no way do I think it's at all ironed out as an idea, but here's the rough of it:

Promote trading of awards. Make it so people who have miles on carrier X but find they could go to their destination on carrier Y have an easier method of doing this and it's considered OKAY by the industry as a part of business! That way, if you have enough miles to fly to some hot spot but there are no seats, instead of getting mad about it, you are directed to an alternative that may work for you and a friend, and the airline was the one who helped direct you. This could create some new form of loyalty and thusly generate more dollars for the airline who's say something like, "Well, I cant help you this time sir, but they can. Please remember that kind act I just did when you need to fly again, and consider flying with us. TY"

I dunno, it may have wheels... (and I hope my airlines of choice are watching this one!)
;)MM

I am sorry-but"every FF seat=lost revenue"is pure nonsense.
The airlines are making huge profits on FF miles by selling them to every possible co-brander out there.It really is a patsy scheme where you are suckered into getting this credit card or that one,get this rental car,stay at this hotel-all of which(and others)are paying for those miles.And then you go to cash in your horde o' miles and are told "sorry"none of those seats are available"but you can use them to fly from Burbank to lovely Fresno-only 25,000 miles-oh wait-you want to do it this weekend?That'll be $75 cash please."
If they were not profitable they would not be so many out there up for grabs.

yup, nonsense indeed! And here's how it goes when it gets REAL interesting in FT:

MM: and THAT is precisely why I try everything I can to save a buck, do a scheme to get miles and do things like gift card schemes, selling or trading awards, buy and return things, fight all fees and policies, and such...

Angry Poster with a Self Righteous Attitude: But MM, that's unethical! It's a business and they would NEVER do that stuff you say they do! And you are scamming them. Intentionally doing this is not right and you are a bad person.

MM: so what? they rip ME off. What would YOU have me do? I will keep on trying to find my own ways to skirt the system because obviously, my rantings and writings to the airlines has hardly done any good...

APwaSRA: MM, you bad bad evil doer, two wrongs dont make a right, etc etc. [flame] [blast] [get other posters involved to say this too and then the thread changes to off topic] [ethics, morals, blah blah]

MM: BUT, the airlines rip us off and they need to come up with BETTER ways to handle their own problems that they now make US pay for, blah blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda...

APwaSRA and coherts: you are babbling. Now everything you say is invalid and I will continue to put this on you just because I think it's ok to jab someone on the internet (and somehow there's no 'morals' against that in here?)

Other posters: This thread used to be interesting and about X. Now it's not.

ONE poster: Well I agree with MM but... (post gets ignored by the ethics dude)

Other other posters: one liner snippets with :d icons

MOD: Thread closed.

How'd I do?
;)MM

Were I counting corporate beans these days (or sitting behind a desk labelled "Marketing" as I once did), my solution would be quick and almost painless....to induce folks to "burn up" their miles and the airlines' liability by filling seats unlikely to be sold. AA has always offered "cheaper" redemptions "off season" (Fall/Winter) to Europe. A smart bean counter carries that practice a double step forward, offering seats on flights with low load factors at deep discounts in points, filling empty seats for the modest cost of on board amenities. For years, premium seats into Milan on DL were far easier to get than those to/from Rome, and I'm sure that there are off season flights into some "Eurogateways" which take off with lower load factors.

As for domestic destinations, take your pick of many of the "medium" non-hub markets. All the down-sizing to RJs involved flights which couldn't fill larger a/c. For those of us who live in the US's "little spoke" airports, awards are even tougher. The Saab 340s here don't have many award seats, but with DFW 2:20 away and IAH only about 3 fours from my door, I'll drive that far for a "discounted" FF seat into an airport to which I would not normally fly.

I agree with this thought in theory; however, I am wondering how many "empty seats" there really are? I haven't flown internationally recently, but almost all the domestic flights I've been on have been packed. Perhaps I just haven't been flying to the right places.

And if they did that, then we here at flyertalk would have to endure even more threads of "How come I couldn't get the super double discount for the flight I want?????" ;)

FF programs should be changed to $ spent rewards. Flyers buying $1,500 first or full Y tickets should get more rewards than a Mileage Runner that spends $150.

That would be the most logical.

Short

I am sorry-but"every FF seat=lost revenue"is pure nonsense.
The airlines are making huge profits on FF miles by selling them to every possible co-brander out there.It really is a patsy scheme where you are suckered into getting this credit card or that one,get this rental car,stay at this hotel-all of which(and others)are paying for those miles.And then you go to cash in your horde o' miles and are told "sorry"none of those seats are available"but you can use them to fly from Burbank to lovely Fresno-only 25,000 miles-oh wait-you want to do it this weekend?That'll be $75 cash please."
If they were not profitable they would not be so many out there up for grabs.

Other than displaying a level of reading comprehension likely to have you heldover in the 6th Grade, you simply missed the point.

The "FF Seat=Lost Revenue" claim applied ONLY to flights which can be predicted to be close to full and those to popular destinations (the LAX vs. BUR syndrome, in which unless you're connecting ... go to LAX anyway?). The way to hold down the cost of FF redemptions is to market them on flights and to destinations with empty seats (and honestly to enourage folks in cities with small airports to get themselves to hubs).

As for the CC miles and other "vendor gimmicks", the same marketing maxim applies. Why see miles used on flights with high revenue and in struggles for few available seats? Very honestly, if I wanted to go to Vienna, AA could get me there far more cheaply getting me from DFW to any NYC airport, forcing me to cross town on my own, and by "purchasing" a seat from Malev to Budapest, a route and destination with fewer folks clamoring to go. FFers here will quickly tell me how to get from Buda to Vienna.

It's simple....First you sell inventory, all that you can, and by methods which minimize potential loss.

I am sorry-but"every FF seat=lost revenue"is pure nonsense.
The airlines are making huge profits on FF miles by selling them to every possible co-brander out there.It really is a patsy scheme where you are suckered into getting this credit card or that one,get this rental car,stay at this hotel-all of which(and others)are paying for those miles.And then you go to cash in your horde o' miles and are told "sorry"none of those seats are available"but you can use them to fly from Burbank to lovely Fresno-only 25,000 miles-oh wait-you want to do it this weekend?That'll be $75 cash please."
If they were not profitable they would not be so many out there up for grabs.

I hope the response to your post taught you a valuable a lesson, there is a certain close-mindedness which seems far more prevalent on FTalk these days:rolleyes:
Dont agree with the sheep and you are get labelled a six grader.


One wonders some of the "experts" and airline CEO wannabes even fly but they are pretty good at flying off at the mouth:)

mike

p.s. dont waste your time answering this post I not even going to return here:(

well I thought the firings across the bow would start later on but it seems they may be here now. :D

Anyway, I still don't understand how the airline can flood the market with miles and promises only to then say NO if you try to use them. It's like a rebate scheme. They know a certain percentage of people will lose the box top as it were and not send in on time. These would be equivelent to mileage holding customers who do not really know HOW to deal with miles or maintain their accounts and then end up never really getting to award level or letting them all expire. (I do not really have an issue with mileage expiry but I liked 3 years and I like it if there can be cases where someone can extend that if they have a really good reason)

Airlines have to make money but in many ways, they already did when they sold the miles to other marketing entities. So are they greedy or are they trying to make tomorrow's money? AND if they still can't balance the budget, why is that our problem?

Until I can see it differently, I will have a bitter taste in my mouth when I fly. I think a lot of people have this bad taste in their mouths.

--and maybe if I am also acting (or typing) like a 6th grader, I could still be taught how to undertsand all of this without being bullied into the process...

;)MM

How'd I do?
;)MMRelax.

Get a soothing snifter of brandy. Mmmmm. Let the vapor work its way up your nose to tickle and soothe your olfactory senses.

Lay back, close your eyes. Get some sleep.

You'll feel better about it in the morning. Trust me. :)

Relax.

Get a soothing snifter of brandy. Mmmmm. Let the vapor work its way up your nose to tickle and soothe your olfactory senses.

Lay back, close your eyes. Get some sleep.

You'll feel better about it in the morning. Trust me. :)

But But (rant rant whine) But!...

Ahhhhh... mmmm Hennessy!

That's so goooood!

Thanks dood!
:D

Anyway, I still don't understand how the airline can flood the market with miles and promises only to then say NO if you try to use them.

Until I can see it differently, I will have a bitter taste in my mouth when I fly. I think a lot of people have this bad taste in their mouths.

Most airlines NEVER say 'NO'...they simply say 'no' to use a saver miles. The sad reality is that while the airlines want us to believe that Saver awards are 'discount' and Standard awards are, well, 'standard', they go out of their way to market Saver awards as 'standard', so that we end up perceiving Standard awards to actually be 'premium' or 'double'.

I have NEVER booked a Standard or double mile award and I've easily burned close to 50 international J and F itins, so the Saver awards are indeed out there.

Rigid dates, rigid itineraries and routings, rigid expectations and lack of patience and perseverance are the only things keeping most of us from utilizing Saver awards.

FF programs should be changed to $ spent rewards. Flyers buying $1,500 first or full Y tickets should get more rewards than a Mileage Runner that spends $150.

That would be the most logical.

Short

Aaahhhh...but FF programs were never intended to be logical in that sense. I'm serious.

The programs were founded in the early 1980's. The target audience at that time was business travelers - much moreso than today. Airlines know that most business travelers are allowed to pick which airline they fly within reason. They also know that most business travelers cannot ethically accept a straight cash kickback. Hence the loyalty programs with a fake currency that is very detached from cash.

It became culturally and ethically acceptable for business travelers to keep their miles, whereas had they been hard-linked to the fare paid, that wouldn't have happened. The result was that biz travelers had every incentive to stick with your airline, because the rewards were essentially "free" - and quite lucrative.

For leisure travelers, as we all know, no miles are free: their cost is baked in to anything you buy that generates miles whether it be flights, flowers, or a regular credit card purchase. But it's the business travelers that got this whole thing rolling, and for that to happen the programs had to stay as far detached from something that looked like a "kickback" as possible.

The people who thought this up 25 years ago were pure marketing geniuses. (I mean that in a good way - it's been a very nice ride for people like us who became fans of the programs whether through biz or leisure travel.)

FF programs should be changed to $ spent rewards. Flyers buying $1,500 first or full Y tickets should get more rewards than a Mileage Runner that spends $150.

That would be the most logical.

Short

But they already do. For example, LH M&M or BD DC gives 300% mileage for F or 200% for C. Also, UA Global Service is revenue based. And soon SQ PPS will be one too.

Most airlines NEVER say 'NO'...they simply say 'no' to use a saver miles...

indeed, and I have a real problem shelling out double miles for something I know is less.

Now, I will agree that something should be done to "award" the savvy planner who thinks ahead for travel needs, and this person, whether intending to do it or not, is helping all of us by planning well in advance. But to make us pay say, 100,000 miles to fly on a trip that should be 50k is NOT good. All it's done is up the ante and now, like gas prices, we suddenly are sometimes "okay" with the increased cost and we find ourselves justifying it even as we complain about it.

...The programs were founded in the early 1980's. The target audience at that time was business travelers - much moreso than today. Airlines know that most business travelers are allowed to pick which airline they fly within reason. They also know that most business travelers cannot ethically accept a straight cash kickback. Hence the loyalty programs with a fake currency that is very detached from cash...

Are you certain? I wonder if they just marketed to people who looked like travelers--business or not. I was a traveler in those days and also got the CCs to charge things and get more miles. But I was no business traveler when I was first heavily marketed to in those days and they had to know this. I did have all the cards and had joined all the programs, but I knew only pure flying would ever get me anywhere and for that, I'd have to chose one airline to concentrate on and gain my awards faster. When you finally did attain the award level, it was easy to get a free flight.

Sure it's never 100% "free" but it's all psychology marketing and it works.

In my opinion--and I think only starwood still does this--I think paying for the flight with a bunch of cash or a bunch of miles should be the same thing. With limited exceptions, you can call the hotel chain and book a room with either means.

This is how it should still be...Kind of like when you go to CVS stores and use cash or cash plus some coupons they gave you last time you shopped there. In fact, I have even used a combination of several coupons there and ended up being owed a buck or two!

How would the airlines accomplish this? Well, what we need is another marketing genius to surface that alters policy for the next 25 years!

FF programs should be changed to $ spent rewards. Flyers buying $1,500 first or full Y tickets should get more rewards than a Mileage Runner that spends $150.

That would be the most logical.
Independence (DH) did that in their program and that's what most of the car rental and hotel companies do.

I think the important aspect here is what MM noted -- the currency had to be fake and not revenue-based in the beginning, but now that it's established most companies see that as a benefit to the employee and don't concern themselves with it. The others that came around afterward could be dollar-based going forward.

This is in no way a criticism of business travelers, but when they fly, their tickets are often not paid for by THEM, but the company they work for. Even if they use their own CC to pay for the tickets, the company reimburses them later and they get points AND status (for flying a lot and possibly ending up in F either because they have the miles and upgrades or because their company wants to better represent them)

But a leisure traveler pretty much buys tickets for themself, and possibly the whole family out of pocket until they happen to earn enough miles thru whatever means are available. On that one flight they have been saving up for, it is good to be able to actually use those miles!

problem: leisure travelers who do not otherwise fly business when not on vacations with the family dont get there fast enough.

Business travelers who fly so much they deserve to get good service and know exactly what to do in the world of flying are finding there are no seats available when they DO want to fly on vacations.

I like how there are many many ways to earn miles for everything I do. I like the airline malls (AA and NWA being my favorites) and I like CC use and promos. I even like all those pudding guy type gigs you find in stores on box tops.

The other problem is that there are no TOO many ways to earn miles and so we have an overflow when everyone comes to redeem them. We know this, but I personally would sacrifice some of that if it meant my miles could be used when I do reach award levels. And so, if it were up to me, I would taper down the means to earn while not forcing you to have to have activity every 18 months or you lose your miles, and I would disclose the availability of award seating. I still think some promos and credit card miles are as valid as anything else. Promos make for good loyalty and credit cards have always been around with mileage gigs. I would even have it so the airlines no longer give out miles for hotel or car. Instead they suggest that you join this or that hotel or car rental points program. This would generate partnership business for them and lessen the confusion and fine print fees and restrictions for us. As well, it would enable -- and promote the best use of those programs! For example, you fly AA and it has something or someone who says, "Well, we suggest you sign up now for the SPG program, sir. If you do, we give X for getting it now..." I dunno. Thoughts welcome on this one.

In otherwords, bring it back a few years and add in a few new age enhancements, but in some crafty way where it does not look like some restriction that the airlines are so famous for always announcing to us.

:)MM

But to make us pay say, 100,000 miles to fly on a trip that should be 50k is NOT good. All it's done is up the ante and now, like gas prices, we suddenly are sometimes "okay" with the increased cost and we find ourselves justifying it even as we complain about it

I dont want to get OT but I understand the complaint about the mileage bump. The Airline directly controls the miles available and also the rates that are needed for redemption.

As for gasoline, its out of the oil companies hands. Not to say that they arent giddy when the world bids up oil futures and we see barrel prices at $60 and higher. But oil companies are going to pump that crude out of the ground whether they get $20 a barrel or $60. Which is directly opposite to how Airlines constrict or eliminate the "Saver" or as I call them the Normal mileage redemption rate.

Ken in Phx

ok Ken, I have read between the lines here and STILL cannot figure out all the cool mileage earning gift card schemes hidden in that post that you are REALLY talking about! :D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

and by the way, you make a good point, mate.

As for the CC miles and other "vendor gimmicks", the same marketing maxim applies. Why see miles used on flights with high revenue and in struggles for few available seats? Very honestly, if I wanted to go to Vienna, AA could get me there far more cheaply getting me from DFW to any NYC airport, forcing me to cross town on my own, and by "purchasing" a seat from Malev to Budapest, a route and destination with fewer folks clamoring to go. FFers here will quickly tell me how to get from Buda to Vienna.


FTers can figure this out for ourselves, but the airlines need to come up with a way to help encourage that sort of innovative thinking with the rest of the "unwashed masses."

The question is how to do that in a sufficiently proactive way as to help the customer with their planning of the trip. Something like the award search for availability between airports automatically, or with a prominant "switch" labeled "alternate routing search" that a customer can click on when availability doesn't exist in their preferred date. (Remember that lots of time-share/vacation club deals are weekend-to-weekend, so lots of people don't want to be that flexible in their time, as in arrive and leave mid-week. Recognize that and work with it to make life easier for the customer, and the customer will preferentially come to they who make their life easier.

Steve

Are you certain? I wonder if they just marketed to people who looked like travelers--business or not.

Perhaps somewhat....but my guess is that the first persona they defined as a member of the target audience for U.S. airline marketing campaigns immediately post-deregulation was a white male in his 40's, upper-middle-class, married with kids, traveling extensively for business and occasionally taking the family on vacation. Not to say there weren't other personas/demographics: I'm just saying that in 1980 or so that was likely the most prominent one.

Clearly FFP marketing today is more complicated and seeks to reach a much more diverse audience.

In my opinion--and I think only starwood still does this--I think paying for the flight with a bunch of cash or a bunch of miles should be the same thing. With limited exceptions, you can call the hotel chain and book a room with either means.

This is how it should still be...

OK, I'm kind of with you on Starwood, although I'm still a bit cranky about their recent devaluation. But anyway, the hotel programs evolved a bit after the airlines, and they did collectively take one step closer to linking their points to revenue. The earning side is revenue-based, but the redeeming side isn't. Culturally/ethically, we're all still okay with that - companies allow employees to keep their hotel points.

How would the airlines accomplish this? Well, what we need is another marketing genius to surface that alters policy for the next 25 years!

My only fear is that the new genius might develop a system that I can't exploit as much as this one. :) Let's face it: there's still a ton of room in the current system to achieve value simply by knowing the game well. By knowing how and where to look for award seats and routing, I'm still getting the seats I want to the places I want. (Granted, I avoid the peak tourist spots during peak seasons for many reasons including lack of award seats.)

Many airlines do give you more mileage for higher fares. For example, United gives you 150 percent of the actual mileage for Y and B fares.

Many airlines do give you more mileage for higher fares. For example, United gives you 150 percent of the actual mileage for Y and B fares.
Noted in post #15. The originating point is still not addressed in that the number of miles/points is not directly related to revenue, which allows me to earn 6000+ base miles on an $88 fare while while other people earn only 1000 and pay $350. And that's still not paying enough for that route to qualify as Y/B fare class, so there's no bonus.

Noted in post #15. The originating point is still not addressed in that the number of miles/points is not directly related to revenue, which allows me to earn 6000+ base miles on an $88 fare while while other people earn only 1000 and pay $350. And that's still not paying enough for that route to qualify as Y/B fare class, so there's no bonus.

But do the airlines really need to address this point? You represent a tiny fraction of 1% of all travelers. Probably 1 in 100,000 paid seats is occupied by a mileage runner. Maybe 1 in 100 is occupied by somebody who actually pays close attention to frequent-flier miles. By that I mean close enough to (a) notice good mileage-earning routings and take them, even when they aren't pure mileage runs and (b) pays enough attention to strategically use their miles in the best possible manner given their travel needs.

The airlines know a few people take mileage runs. They don't seem to mind it. Certainly, they could change the routing rules requirements and close the door on the best MR's. They could alter minimum-stay requirements and eliminate the "pure" MR (where the traveler doesn't even leave the airport). But they don't... Maybe it's because they know that anybody willing to MR must also be a fan, and killing off your own evangelists is counterproductive. (Only the RIAA has taken the approach that all of their fans are evil and must be alienated...oops...that's OMNI.)

Anyway, I'm not a pure mileage runner myself, but I pay close attention to how I earn & burn. I've loaded up on enough United bonuses and gone out of my way to "play" some of their promos to my advantage. But I also buy $339 walk-up one-way fares to Seattle on occasion, so they're making it up in the long run. :)

"Creative" financing = defrauding lenders.

"Creative" FF programs = defrauding members?

United offers weekly 'e-fares', usually deeply discounted fares that require travel within a short window and with a little advance notice, presumably on routings that have plenty of excess supply.

A logical and beneficial extension of 'e-fares' should be 'e-awards', the ability to redeem discounted awards (25-50% off) on targeted routes with excess seat inventory.

KLM's FFP and now its merged KLM/AF FFP offer 'Web Awards', whereby for a30-90 day window, certain routes allow award redemption for 50% in both Coach and Business cabins in many instances.

So, the precedent exists. Is it time for the US FFPs to emulate this customer-friendly strategy that doesn't hurt the FFPs or airlines bottom line?

A logical and beneficial extension of 'e-fares' should be 'e-awards', the ability to redeem discounted awards (25-50% off) on targeted routes with excess seat inventory.
CO (used to, I don't know about know) offer that scheme. Reduced miles (as few as 7500).

FF programs should be changed to $ spent rewards. Flyers buying $1,500 first or full Y tickets should get more rewards than a Mileage Runner that spends $150.

To some degree they do, at least with schemes that give higher fares more than 100% of miles flown. Many of these also count those bonus miles toward status.

Tying awards directly to revenue and fully to scale (e.g. $2,000 spent gets twice the benefits of $1,000) could cause a revolt with companies, which have fumed for many years that the programs add a big cost to them for a small benefit for employees. There's often a suspicion in big companies that some employees game the system, waiting to book late because they know that expensive Y ticket will probably get upgraded and have more miles. Large companies have tried before to get airlines to offer non-mileage-earning fares for a % discount.

I think the airlines really crossed over into pyramid-land with all the non-flying sales of miles in recent years.

I think the crunch will really hit when baby boomers retire (62 in 2008, 65 in 2011 and after). Lots of people who had to hoard miles during their careers will want to use them to travel in retirement, and that'll exacerbate current imbalances.

"Creative" financing = defrauding lenders.

"Creative" FF programs = defrauding members?

while it sooo should not be this interpretation of the word, you are so right!

United offers weekly 'e-fares', usually deeply discounted fares that require travel within a short window and with a little advance notice, presumably on routings that have plenty of excess supply.

A logical and beneficial extension of 'e-fares' should be 'e-awards', the ability to redeem discounted awards (25-50% off) on targeted routes with excess seat inventory.

KLM's FFP and now its merged KLM/AF FFP offer 'Web Awards', whereby for a30-90 day window, certain routes allow award redemption for 50% in both Coach and Business cabins in many instances.

So, the precedent exists. Is it time for the US FFPs to emulate this customer-friendly strategy that doesn't hurt the FFPs or airlines bottom line?

Make sense. I know a lot of them do it via published promotions (e.g., Bermuda for 20k this summer on United), but what you're talking about is a regularly updated list of discounted awards. I'd love to see that. (CO is the one U.S. airline I know little about, so if they're already doing it, kudos to them.)

The only catch, of course, would be that these routes probably wouldn't have a very high ROI in terms of value for your miles. By definition, they'd be off-peak destinations where airfares are also low. (Although the UA example is running during a good season for Bermuda, so maybe it doesn't always have to be this way!) But...if they threw some discounted J/F awards in there, I might still bite.

Anyone know what this thread is about?

Didja read the OP? It's about finding ways ("creative" ways, per the title) for airlines to reduce their outstanding FF mile liability by encouraging people to use miles on lower-load/emptier flights.

Maybe I'm just dumb and it's not as straightforward as that, but that's what I thought...

I have NEVER booked a Standard or double mile award and I've easily burned close to 50 international J and F itins, so the Saver awards are indeed out there.
Rigid dates, rigid itineraries and routings, rigid expectations and lack of patience and perseverance are the only things keeping most of us from utilizing Saver awards.
Ditto for the first point (only 9 award flights in the last 3 years) and absolutely believe the second point. Made a similar point on a recent post. I simply do not understand how people can feel that they are being ripped off (remember point 2).

I'm the OP and you have it right. Even the proposal for "reducing" the FF mile costs for the weekend "bargain" e-fares has something to be said for it, a way for the airlines to "burn off" miles putting butts in otherwise unoccupied seats, optimal cost-accountant's approach.

I harbor an edge of resentment to the "late redemption fees", charging for rewards booked on short notice. Not only do they "cost" the airline no more to reserve and ticket (and "charge" my account), but a late reward certainly represents the use of a seat likely to go out empty.

I still return to one of my original claims, howver, that prospectively empty Winter seats to Potato Bog, Maine and East Lapland International ought to be marketed at lower "prices", both for "Savers" and regular redemptions, warming up the Treasurer by burning off mileage liabilities.

Interestingly, Alaska Airlines uses terminology to reinforce what happytraveling says: the capacity-controlled (20,000-mile) awards are called "standard" awards and the non-capacity-controlled (40,000-mile) awards are called "peak."

Fortunately, standard (aka "saver" or "non-peak") award availability on AS is pretty darn good. Unfortunately, they don't have the route structure to offer international availability, and so trying to redeem international "saver" awards on other carriers (BA, QF, AA, etc.) puts you against the same brick wall you face on those carriers.

I just find it interesting that AS acknowledges that most people view the cheaper awards as standard and the more expensive ones as not desirable. It's all semantics, but...