US Airways Dividend Miles - Will US Airways Change The 500 Mile Per Flight Segment

Do you think they will change?

Change it back? Doubtful.

Admit they were wrong? Don't count on it! They'd sooner blame the exodus of ALL customers on anything other than their own stupid policy change.

It seems as though they're begging DL to steal all of their DCA,LGA,BOS Shuttle passengers. Plus, I hear the LGA Marine Terminal (DL) is supposed to be nice!

I doubt they change it back - and even if they did, I'm not sure they'd win back my business! I need to cash in my miles before they're out of *A.

It seems as though they're begging DL to steal all of their DCA,LGA,BOS Shuttle passengers. Plus, I hear the LGA Marine Terminal (DL) is supposed to be nice!

I doubt they change it back - and even if they did, I'm not sure they'd win back my business! I need to cash in my miles before they're out of *A.

MAT is indeed a nice terminal...show up 15 minutes before the flight and you're good to go.

I think if enough people voice their opposition by moving their business else where, US would probably reverse course. However, if their bottom line doesn't feel the pain, it's not happening!

LAX

I think if enough people voice their opposition by moving their business else where, US would probably reverse course. However, if their bottom line doesn't feel the pain, it's not happening!


I think that US is more than happy to leave things the way they are and watch the "premium" fliers depart. In their mind, the CP level of customer is a pain in the bottom line, since they require many resources to keep them happy. These include adequate upgrade availability (i.e. first class or special economy seats on planes), special contact lines, international upgrades, etc. etc. While it is true that business fliers do a lot of traveling, they also do the most complaining when flights or services go awry. In times of economic distress with elevated oil prices, cutting costs is more important than satisfying one small segment of your customer base, especially when planes are full of non-elite fliers. So, what easier way to reduce costs than by eliminating "frills" (especially the frills demanded by elite fliers). US is morphing into a low cost airline and if I am not mistaken, most bargain basement airlines don't have elite desks :(.

I wonder how much ticket sales have dropped off since yesterday, which was the first day in which the new policy went into effect for bookings.

I think if enough people voice their opposition by moving their business else where, US would probably reverse course. However, if their bottom line doesn't feel the pain, it's not happening!


I think that US is more than happy to leave things the way they are and watch the "premium" fliers depart. In their mind, the CP level of customer is a pain in the bottom line, since they require many resources to keep them happy. These include adequate upgrade availability (i.e. first class or special economy seats on planes), special contact lines, international upgrades, etc. etc. While it is true that business fliers do a lot of traveling, they also do the most complaining when flights or services go awry. In times of economic distress with elevated oil prices, cutting costs is more important than satisfying one small segment of your customer base, especially when planes are full of non-elite fliers. So, what easier way to reduce costs than by eliminating "frills" (especially the frills demanded by elite fliers). US is morphing into a low cost airline and if I am not mistaken, most bargain basement airlines don't have elite desks :(.

I think I mentioned this in another thread, but if US is happy without the "premium" flyers, it's certainly doing a pretty good job achieving that. However, I think that's not a very good strategy as most profits come from premium pax. Having said the, many so called LCCs have done a pretty good job chasing non-premium pax, but US just doesn't have the cost structure to compete for that segment since lowest price seems to be the prevailing factor.

US certain can try to transform itself into a true LCC by doing away with elites, F/C cabins, etc., but abandoning the premium pax may not be a very profitable way to go, IMHO.

LAX

I wonder how much ticket sales have dropped off since yesterday, which was the first day in which the new policy went into effect for bookings.


Probably not much yet. The policy doesn't really start until May 1st for tickets booked after March 1st.

Do you think they will change?

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta. If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta. Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

It seems as though they're begging DL to steal all of their DCA,LGA,BOS Shuttle passengers. Plus, I hear the LGA Marine Terminal (DL) is supposed to be nice!

I doubt they change it back - and even if they did, I'm not sure they'd win back my business! I need to cash in my miles before they're out of *A.

This silly rumour persists, that US will somehow be hounded out of the Star Alliance. There is no basis for it at all. With the expanded European service, plus upcoming China flights, the airline has become yet more valuable within the Alliance.

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta. If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta. Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

Even with bonuses, US still takes TWICE AS LONG to earn an award ticket - which is why most business folks like their miles. F is nice, but we FT'ers are a minority in that we will fight tooth and nail for that donut stick in F on the <1hr flight on shuttle. The awards difference is even more pronounced for Gold and Platinum levels of flyers.

Also, if one didn't care about upgrades, they could also credit to CO on the DL flights. While it doesn't give DL a huge comeptitive advantage, it also means US has none. Combine that with dumping corporate contracts and US is playing defense. The key for Tempe is to see how far they can push it - and they're determined to find that. Just like they did with operations.

[QUOTE=warbo;9346983]I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta.

Do you really think that the biggest market for short haul is those hub cities? Certainly I am no expert, but I would guess that there are a lot of smaller market fliers like me (ORF) that have to connect thrrough a hub on most airlines. When I began traveling alot, I gravitated to US because they went to more of the places I had to go. I was able to accumulate enough miles on one carrier to do some good. With the new policy, it will take me about 5 years to accumulate enough miles on the short runs I make to take my family of 5 anywhere (we always have to use double miles to get our seats for some reason). So I have a lot less incentive to worry about concentrating miles. We don't have many mainline flights here, so status isn't terribly important.
PT

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta. If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta. Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

I STRONGLY disagree with this....When I look at my receipts for travel, each segment is broken into separate costs. My CHS-CLT used to be $180 with the CLT-XXX being much cheaper because of more competition. There are A LOT of other people who are in this boat and it is all about VALUE. US no longer adds VALUE to fly them....I wont pay $900 to do PHL-BOS-PHL and get nothing in return. Yes, we all want a safe flight, but the MX delays, poor service, and now, less miles make DL (or any other airline for that matter) look way better....segments or not, it is the principle of the matter..........

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta. If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta. Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

warbo, I just don't see how this "keeps US ahead of the competition". That phrase implies that the change provides some sort of enhancement/advantage versus the competition. Try as US management might to claim otherwise, this change is a clear and incontestable downgrade to the DM program that degrades its competitive position.

With respect, I've seen the analysis of DL vs US elsewhere, and it's an oversimplification. I am a customer in this market who used to qualify on PQM with a combination of Shuttle flights/other short hops in the Northeast and longer trips over 500 mi. (And I paid dearly for those short hops, at $0.35-1.10 per mile versus $0.10-0.11 per mile for transcons.) This change makes it much more difficult for such elites to qualify for a given level based on PQM. As a direct result, US has lost my business altogether and I'm content flying those short hops on AA ERJs (at 500 min mi) to make requalifying over there that much easier.

Also, free upgrades are not relevant to the many high-revenue short hops in the Northeast that use regional jets and props. Even the upgrades on the Shuttle aren't worth much for such a short flight.

Back on topic - if US were to rescind this change, would I come back? It wouldn't hurt and I might consider throwing them a few flights where they have significantly better prices or schedules. However, when you take into account the full list of downgrades to the DM program, (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=790718) it's tough to make a case that it's worth the effort to remain an elite.

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta.

I don't mean to be rude, but I don't think you're quite aware of what you're talking about here.

US Airways has historically been "the Northeast" airline, with Delta and Continental being strong second-tier players.

First of all, the Northeast goes well beyond the three markets you've just listed. The Northeast includes a number of major markets outside of NY, Washington and Boston including:

1) Providence, RI;
2) Hartford, CT (the insurance capital of North America);
3) Rochester, NY (HQ of Kodak and Bausch & Lomb, major site for Xerox);
4) NY's Capital Region;
5) Philadelphia;
6) Pittsburgh;
7) Baltimore.

There's also service to the Toronto-Ottawa-Montreal corridor airports which is under 500 miles for the bulk of the US Airways northeast system.

Consider the tertiary domestic regions that are high-yield, high-fare express destinations such as:

1) Portland, ME;
2) Manchester, NH;
3) New Haven, CT;
4) Syracuse, NY;
5) Buffalo, NY;
6) Allentown, PA;
7) Burlington, VT;

and on and on. A round trip between Burlington, VT and Boston on US Airways Express can often cost 2x as much as a shuttle ticket.

Secondly, the competition is NOT restricted to Delta. Continental is a major player at EWR, AA maintains significant presence in BOS, United is a strong player in Washington DC (for those who prefer nonstops from Dulles), and jetBlue has been eroding US's position in New England and New York City for a while now. DL, CO, and AA all have MASSIVE express operations in the Northeast that cover all those cities as well as destinations in Ontario, Quebec and the Maritimes not served by mainline flights.

800-lb gorilla Delta has a large and growing hub at JFK, and has pushed US out of first place in Boston. Continental has a large and growing hub at EWR. Southwest is eating US's lunch at PHL and has a significant presence in Hartford and Manchester. jetBlue is adding new nonstops on a daily basis from BOS at lower fares (and taking away the leisure and infrequent business travel US sold out of BOS). And even good old AA and American Eagle maintain a focus city and hub, respectively, in Boston.

The northeast traveler is not just going between three cities, and he's now got a large number of high frequency, high quality alternatives with superior frequent flyer programs. US has rooked itself.

I have managed, in the last three weeks, to fly eight different itineraries in the northeast -- both in the three-city-corridor you mention, as well as to a few of the tertiary cities I listed and to Montreal.

In all cases, I was able to divert business exclusively to SkyTeam carriers (and fly Delta in most of those cases).

In all cases, the itineraries were at a comparable or lower price than what US or US Express wanted.

In all cases, the itinerary was no more complicated than on US (either a nonstop flight or single connection through JFK or EWR).

The idea that US has no competition in the northeast is wrong. And anecdotally, I met a couple of people flying Continental who were former US FFs, who mentioned that they were trying out Continental due to US's decision to screw short-segment travelers.

If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta.

That's only assuming that all you do is short hops. You also excluded Continental, which operates a huge northeast network, from your calculations. Continental provides credit for segments as well and often has much lower fares. It also has better operational performance and a superior in-flight experience.

Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

You must not fly the US system in the USA very often -- free upgrades on short-hops are almost impossible to get, except for CPs, as a result of the decrease in first class seats.

For shuttle routes, the average frequent hopper is better off in the Delta product, with its greater legroom throughout coach and its amenities (which mirror the US snack basket in first).

Continental's services to EWR are also a viable alternative on this route with the same upgrade options. EWR is more convenient in terms of access to Manhattan than LGA, and CO offers the same upgrades as US, with greater availability and higher quality service.

Delta also flies numerous nonstop services to DCA and JFK from BOS that offer first class, etc.

AA operates a number of flights as well.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

How?

US cuts benefits, punishes its highest-margin business travelers and virtually invites them to test out the alternatives. That's just dumb.

This is the equivalent of British Airways deciding to screw passengers on the European short-haul market. It handed over the short-haul premium market to BMI and the short-haul "low end" market to easyJet. Except unlike BA, US Airways doesn't have a massive global hub for international-to-international connecting passengers to fall back on.

Frequent hoppers are US's bread and butter, and now we're busy checking out the alternatives when we had no real reason to just a few weeks ago.

The *only* people who will get any advantage to staying with US are hub captives at PHL. *Everyone* else in the northeast can get the same destinations, with similar itineraries, connecting times, frequencies, and fares, from numerous other airlines who have a better FF program.

Dumb, dumb, dumb, US.

Delta, Continental and AA are probably going to be upping frequencies and taking aim at US tertiary strongholds due to this move, to convince people to connect at EWR, JFK T2/T3, and BOS as a result of US's boneheadedness. All three are aggressive players who mean business and plan to invest billions to win in the Northeast. All three also have a superior product and greater reach than US. Delta is in a struggle to avoid bankruptcy number 2 and will do everything it can to take every high-fare passenger US Airways has got left to stay in the air. It's only downhill from here in the Old US's system -- all those passengers US has always took for granted have choices they didn't have 15 years ago and a reason to go over and fly those choices instead of US.

It's like slow suicide and pains me greatly to watch it.

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta.

How many daily flights are on this route vs. say LAS-SoCal?

Examples for the OP's arguement....

I just moved all of my BOS-PHL business to Delta and Southwest. I can get 500 miles, if stuck using BOS and the Biofares or go up to MAN and get a real jet and not USexpress for usually half the cost!

As for my BOS-BUF hops... I dumped the US CRJs that won't give me 500 miles.... I'm taking B6 direct in their new E190s with leather seats and TV...

I'm sure other have examples as well, but to me, this is a good way for US to give away business to the other airlines.... I went CP to PLT this year and I only need to be GP to use the LH clubs on the trips to Europe.

The 500 miles used to be an incentive to take US, now its every man for themselves and that means US loses.

Thanks Dougie.

I doubt they will change it back because the biggest market for the less-than-500 miles frequent flyer is on the NYC-WAS-BOS shuttle, and the only competitor is Delta. If I were a customer in this market, I'd stick with US. 2 reasons - US allows per-segment credit for status, which means you move up the preferred ranks far quicker than on Delta. Secondly, First Class on the Shuttle with free upgrades for preferreds.

I've been with US for 7 years now and am the first to agree with the detractors when I see what I think to be a poor business decision. However, this makes perfect sense and keeps US ahead of the competition.

Not to beat a dead horse, but this argument only makes sense if (1) one flies exclusively short-haul and qualifies on segments rather than miles -- in which case flying DL will not get you segments -- and (2) one cares more about status than awards tickets. If you fly a mixture of short- and long-haul, or if your goal is to get domestic rewards tickets, the competition (including FL and WN) is better. If your goal is to earn European rewards tickets, US is still worse than all other legacies.

I personally credit my US flying to UA, but suppose I was a US Gold with equivalent status on DL, and fly a mixture of long- and short-haul and thus qualify with miles. Flying PHL-BOS roundtrip on US would net 560 or so EQM and 840 RDM, vs. 1000 EQM and 2000 RDM on DL (and even more EQM if flying an expensive ticket). Not to mention that, the last time I checked, DL was less expensive. I'd rather fly in a E190 than a CRJ but I'm not sure it's worth $500 to do so for a one-hour flight.

The only advantages that I can think of for the US shuttle now are the ability to be upgraded if you are a US elite and maybe the ability to get a taxicab easily when leaving LGA. If you're in coach, there are no advantages to flying US rather than DL.

If you are an East Coast business traveler from somewhere other than PHL and CLT, there are no compelling reasons any more to fly US. This decision keeps US ahead of the competition only insofar as the competition is to be the least attractive carrier for business travelers.

Examples for the OP's arguement....

I just moved all of my BOS-PHL business to Delta and Southwest. I can get 500 miles, if stuck using BOS and the Biofares or go up to MAN and get a real jet and not USexpress for usually half the cost!


I think you mean MHT; going to MAN will, of course, get you a real jet on US but you will need an amphibious car to drive there. ;)

The only advantages that I can think of for the US shuttle now are the ability to be upgraded if you are a US elite and maybe the ability to get a taxicab easily when leaving LGA. If you're in coach, there are no advantages to flying US rather than DL.


...other than the fact that the DL shuttle does not fly BOS->DCA :(

How many daily flights are on this route vs. say LAS-SoCal?

LGA-DCA = 16 flights/day (each direction)
LGA-BOS = 16 flights/day (each direction)
DCA-BOS = 15 flights/day (each direction)

= 94 flights/day

But, as others have said, there is much much more to the Northeast market than the Shuttle.

Consider the tertiary domestic regions that are high-yield, high-fare express destinations such as:

1) Portland, ME;
2) Manchester, NH;
3) New Haven, CT;
4) Syracuse, NY;
5) Buffalo, NY;
6) Allentown, PA;
7) Burlington, VT;


8) Ithaca, NY (Cornell University)

Weekday rt fares run $500 and up for 357 mi = $1.40/mi

I think if enough people voice their opposition by moving their business else where, US would probably reverse course. However, if their bottom line doesn't feel the pain, it's not happening!

Exactly correct.

There are many people on this board who think that most travellers value what THEY value, and that US management is stupid.

Both are not necessarily true.

US management is being very clear here what THEY think customers want: reliable, convenient and clean-looking aircraft. It's what they're spending money on, and the focus of their business plan. They do not think that a more generous frequent flyer program is what will bring in the revenue they seek (and they obviously need more revenue, and few expenses, given the crazy increase in fuel costs).

People who read flyertalk (including me!) are obviously very frequent-flyer-program oriented. It's what WE value. But it is a mistake to believe that MOST travellers share our values (including the high-spending travellers that airline managers crave).

Personally, I think the decision to eliminate the 500-mile minimum is a mistake because the amount of miles they "save" is minimal (especially with the 18-month inactivity penalty), and the decision risks alienating certain lurcrative short-haul frequent flyers. But I admit to not having access to the marketing data that management has. Either they're confident that others will match, or they don't believe they'll lose more revenue than they will save in expense.

If their predictions turn out to be false, I'm sure we'll see some new incentives to attract short-haul travellers. If their forecasts were right, we won't.

You also excluded Continental, which operates a huge northeast network, from your calculations. Continental provides credit for segments as well and often has much lower fares. It also has better operational performance and a superior in-flight experience.

Sadly I don't think Continental's system-wide operational performance statistics reflect the reality for northeast passengers. EWR is the most-delayed airport in the nation and getting worse. Proposals for slot limitations at JFK and EWR will also change the calculus of a NY-area hub somewhat.

That being said, I always enjoyed flying them back when I was a NW elite. Are they still flying Boston flights into a separate terminal at EWR along with other cities in the first few letters of the alphabet?

US management is being very clear here what THEY think customers want: reliable, convenient and clean-looking aircraft.

It'll take some doing to convince me of that. Unless, as usual, they
have determined what customers want and are hellbent on providing
the opposite.

Are they still flying Boston flights into a separate terminal at EWR along with other cities in the first few letters of the alphabet?
Yes, a few flights, mostly to other airlines' hubs (BOS an exception), eg DFW, are at terminal A at EWR. This is about to switch (progressively through August), with all CO Express at A and all mainline departures (and domestic mainline arrivals) at C.

I agree that flying US other than through PHL may well be more on-time than CO through EWR.

Exactly correct.

There are many people on this board who think that most travellers value what THEY value, and that US management is stupid.

Both are not necessarily true.

US management is being very clear here what THEY think customers want: reliable, convenient and clean-looking aircraft.

Actually, we have found that most frequent travelers do in fact value what we value. How do we know? FFOCUS has conducted surveys of members and non members alike, and we ALL speak to people on board airplanes or in airports. More often than not, people tell us they agree with what we are thinking, and we have attracted even MORE members as a result.

Regarding US management being stupid, I don't think so in the traditional sense of the word, but their recent track record in running a major airline shows a major disconnect from both customers and employees. I think it would be safe to say that they are short sighted and perhaps in way over their heads.

Now, as to a repeal of the 500 mile minimum change, I think it will have to happen eventually. Why? Because NO other airline has followed. UA even went out of their way to state that they would CONTINUE to award 500 mile minimums for their customers traveling on US code shares. I think they are going to be left out hanging in the breeze on this one--and rightfully so.

What can we do? FFOCUS has issued a call to action, so if you want to make your voice heard, you can visit our web site www.ffocus.org. Also, a new site will be up soon, featuring a petition to reinstate the 500 mile minimum accrual. So far we are under the impression that Tempe's mail servers are overloaded with protests but we need to see tangible evidence.

Now here is a novel idea. We should begin faxing our receipts for short segment travel on OTHER airlines directly to the VP responsible for this change. We need to show them tangibly how much this poorly thought out decision will COST them. At the appropriate time we will provide a fax number for you but it will likely be on request only.

In a recent interview, Doug Parker said that if the airline oversteps on any of its changes they will have to reverse course...these are his words. It's up to us to make sure that this quote comes back to haunt him.

Now here is a novel idea. We should begin faxing our receipts for short segment travel on OTHER airlines directly to the VP responsible for this change.



And copy his boss! And his boss's boss!!

And copy his boss! And his boss's boss!!

I like this, I like this alot!

.....but......this past weekend I flew PHX-SAN-LAS-PHX and each of the three segments posted at 500 miles!

.....but......this past weekend I flew PHX-SAN-LAS-PHX and each of the three segments posted at 500 miles!

it doesnt start yet - it applies to tickets bought after March 1 for travel after May something - don't have the exact date in front of me

I like this, I like this alot!

Bosses hate getting complaints about their direct reports.......and their direct reports' direct reports! ;)

I am intrigued by the idea that US may be making a smart business decision when it cuts costs that alienate FFs. To the extent that planes more often fly completely or almost completely full, the airline that spends the least per pax may win--at least in the short term. On a recent weekend on short notice I saw LAS-SAN-LAS fares of over $700 coach. When I went to kayak.com I saw the lowest flights were $500 RT on competitors, but only with goofy routing such as hubbing thru LAX or SFO with lengthy layovers. I realize that usually airlines can't get these prices for such short flights, but, perhaps, US is counting on ticket sales being a seller's market enough of the time that they don't care if their passengers would really rather be flying on a competitor (whose flights are sold out or non-existent in the city to city market offered by US). This may be a short-sighted strategy, but then most CEOs have a short-term outlook.

Just want to add another Star Alliance Gold member to the list of those who will not be flying USAirways short haul flights, including the LGA-DCA and LGA-BOS shuttles, thanks to the ill-advised decision to do away with the 500 mile minimum. They have dug in their heels and so have I. USAirways says you can still get elite qual based on segments but that doesn't work if you have a combination of long and short haul flights. Not sure how much benefit USAirways gets from eliminating the 500 mile minimum but they sure know how to alienate their most loyal customers.

We have been too quiet on this subject. It's time to put your money where your mouth is. If everyone who says they will leave over this actually does so, and we believe there are MANY more who will, we need to show them.

My idea is to start faxing US copies of ALL the receipts for short flights now being booked on OTHER carriers because of this poorly thought out decision.

Also, if anyone has specifically stopped flying US because of this, please PM or email me--if you're willing to talk to the media.

They should have gotten the hint when their own code share partner, UA said they would CONTINUE to honor the 500 mile minimum on flights flown on US metal.....

This is nothing like the $25 bag fee, which makes some sense. This is a frontal attack on those who pay the largest percentage of the bills.

This is reminiscient of another boneheaded change they tried to impose on us almost 6 years ago--which gave rise to the "cockroaches" which begat FFOCUS in the first place.....

Time to speak up, people.

I'm in the minority here but I support this change. It will reduce the competition for upgrades at the upper elite levels by eliminating some of the artificial elite inflation.

Ya know, the other option is to award miles/EQMs based on $s paid in lieu of mileage. Let's remember this is what hotels and rental car companies do.

I'm in the minority here but I support this change. It will reduce the competition for upgrades at the upper elite levels by eliminating some of the artificial elite inflation.

Ya know, the other option is to award miles/EQMs based on $s paid in lieu of mileage. Let's remember this is what hotels and rental car companies do.

As someone who flies primarily transcon, I will not be affected too much by this change, and will possibly even benefit by it for the reasons you state. However, there are two very important points to consider:

1) Those who pay the big bucks for the short-haul routes DESERVE to earn 500 miles at minimum. When you're paying $800 to fly on 4 segments comprising exclusively of Dash and CRJ's, you spend a grand total of 2 hours sitting on the tarmac before the wheels even go up...you have more than earned your 500 miles per segment.

2) Not one other carrier matched US's move. What does that tell you about what other airline management teams think of this policy?

I think the key takeaway here is that when you are in an environment as highly competitive as the airline environment, you have to either conform to the minimum industry standards and consider it "the cost of doing business," or risk losing your most profitable customers. US chose the latter, and if they feel this is a good business decision in a world where oil exceeds $100 a barrel and their target market is one step ahead of foreclosure, then all I can say is "more power to them." :rolleyes:

It will reduce the competition for upgrades at the upper elite levels by eliminating some of the artificial elite inflation.

I really don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but I am flying a number of segments this week and next between CLE, BWI and SYR. I will be spending over $1000 for these flights. I will be doing them on CO, who will give me 750 miles/flight and 2 segments/flight. (Y bonus EQM/EQP). If I were flying US, I would be getting 200-300 miles/flight and 1 segment, even though I am spending the equivalent of a TATL fare for them. What US is saying is that my $1000 is worth less for hopping around the NE that flying across the pond :confused:. If that is the way they want to play the game, fine. I will just pick up my marbles (translation: cash) and move somewhere else.

We have been too quiet on this subject. It's time to put your money where your mouth is. If everyone who says they will leave over this actually does so, and we believe there are MANY more who will, we need to show them.

My idea is to start faxing US copies of ALL the receipts for short flights now being booked on OTHER carriers because of this poorly thought out decision.

Also, if anyone has specifically stopped flying US because of this, please PM or email me--if you're willing to talk to the media.

I just flew LGA-DCA-LGA on AA last week as a direct result of this change, which was the last straw for me. No comments to the press, however ;)

Unfortunately for me I can't stick it to US. They have the only nonstop route from my city to DCA. United flies to IAD, but their departure times aren't early enough, and when they were the flight was canceled half the time anyways.

And leaving the night before and laying over just isn't worth it.

WN corporate headquarters must be laughing. US is the best thing to happen to them. Lets invade their PHL hub, take away or reduce the ticket price of their short haul tickets, and maybe just maybe US will react by reducing the amount of miles for short hauls. In the mean time, WN is reacting with new boarding to eliminate the cattle call, adding business select fare to allow the last minute business traveler to board first and get an exit row (rather than last minute middle seat on US). And hey lets give the business guy in coach a free cocktail.

And people said that the Tempe guys know how to compete with WN

1) Those who pay the big bucks for the short-haul routes DESERVE to earn 500 miles at minimum. When you're paying $800 to fly on 4 segments comprising exclusively of Dash and CRJ's, you spend a grand total of 2 hours sitting on the tarmac before the wheels even go up...you have more than earned your 500 miles per segment.

ss255, I think your choice of words is a bit reflective of the “entitlement society” we seem to be developing into.

Rather, I would use the analogy of taking my wife to an exclusive restaurant with another couple and paying a dinner tab of $800 - for that amount I EXPECT certain things, such as impeccable service, food, perhaps flowers for the ladies, etc. IF, i didn’t receive them (as has happened in the past), quite simply I would no longer frequent that establishment.

It’s really that simple - like I think Art has said, if you don’t like what you are receiving, go ahead and switch your business to a carrier that satisfies you. Otherwise, whining will get you nowhere.

However, be a man (or woman) about it, just change your business but don’t whimp-out by sending them receipts forf a ‘restaurant’ that meets your expectations.

As someone who flies primarily transcon, I will not be affected too much by this change, and will possibly even benefit by it for the reasons you state. However, there are two very important points to consider:

1) Those who pay the big bucks for the short-haul routes DESERVE to earn 500 miles at minimum. When you're paying $800 to fly on 4 segments comprising exclusively of Dash and CRJ's, you spend a grand total of 2 hours sitting on the tarmac before the wheels even go up...you have more than earned your 500 miles per segment.


The way to fix this then is to award miles based on $s, not miles flown. Also, let's remember there are some carriers (I think CO for one and AA in order to achieve their top tier) that only awards 50 percent miles on certain fare classes.

And, yes, I pretty much only fly transcon with a few 600 mile or so trips throughout the year, so this personally has little if any effect on me.

The way to fix this then is to award miles based on $s, not miles flown. Also, let's remember there are some carriers (I think CO for one and AA in order to achieve their top tier) that only awards 50 percent miles on certain fare classes.

And, yes, I pretty much only fly transcon with a few 600 mile or so trips throughout the year, so this personally has little if any effect on me.

Actually, AA awards 100% EQM on all AA flights. As a way to reward high fare/F/J customers, you can also qualify for status on EQPoints, which are awarded at 0.5 to 1.5 pts/mi depending on fare class. And, of course, for flights <500 mi, you still get 500 min EQM AND 500 EQP, irrespective of fare class. ^

I'm in the minority here but I support this change. It will reduce the competition for upgrades at the upper elite levels by eliminating some of the artificial elite inflation.

Hate to say it, but most of you folks are the "elite inflation."

Shorthaul customers are the ones who actually make money for the
foolish airline; I spend 20c+/mi (and have spent up to $1/mi) on these
flights to get my US3.

Hate to say it, but most of you folks are the "elite inflation."

Shorthaul customers are the ones who actually make money for the
foolish airline; I spend 20c+/mi (and have spent up to $1/mi) on these
flights to get my US3.

Unfortunately, the cost / mi for the airlines is nowhere near linear. The cost / mile to fly say BOS to LGA would be much different than say BOS to PHX. This is especially true if you look at the fixed costs involved in each flight.

The way to fix this then is to award miles based on $s, not miles flown. Also, let's remember there are some carriers (I think CO for one and AA in order to achieve their top tier) that only awards 50 percent miles on certain fare classes.



While it is true that CO awards 50% mileage for certain discount fares, this "penalty" is removed if the flight is booked at CO.com. And no, it doesn't cost an extra $5 to book the ticket either. On the other hand, CO does give 150% EQM mileage bonuses for economy Y and H fares as well as 2 EQP's per segment flown. If you pay more, you get more (within reason).

The way to fix this then is to award miles based on $s, not miles flown.

For an excellent analysis of why this probably won't work, see this post (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?p=9475981#post9475981) by Zeffer, which happens to be about the AA upgrade system, but could easily be applied to any loyalty/perks program, including US Preferred status.

The way to fix this then is to award miles based on $s, not miles flown.

Most other legacy carriers award bonus EQM's for Y/B fares, which is the industry standard for rewarding the big spenders. US no longer does this, so what advantage is there to fly US if you fly alot of expensive short-hauls on Y/B fares?

I think if the entire airline industry moved toward a miles-awarded-per-dollar spent like the hotel industry, the whole concept of mileage-running would go away. ;)

US management is being very clear here what THEY think customers want: reliable, convenient and clean-looking aircraft.

But THEY have not produced these things. And even when they do, arriving with one's luggage is still not on the list, unfortunately.

Personally, I think the decision to eliminate the 500-mile minimum is a mistake because the amount of miles they "save" is minimal (especially with the 18-month inactivity penalty), and the decision risks alienating certain lurcrative short-haul frequent flyers. But I admit to not having access to the marketing data that management has. Either they're confident that others will match, or they don't believe they'll lose more revenue than they will save in expense.

I don't need their data--they control redemption. Keep printing money--it's not like I have to be able to spend it.

However, be a man (or woman) about it, just change your business but don’t whimp-out by sending them receipts forf a ‘restaurant’ that meets your expectations.

Newsflash: people doing this in hoards (And demonstrating exactly how much money was walking away) was what got the East management to come to their senses.

I was initially shocked--it took them $20k worth of not-Envoy receipts, but even I eventually got a call from CCY.

It's a perfect display of cause and effect for those made this decision. Hey, they can always do as they've consistently done and ignore their (formerly) best customers.....

Most other legacy carriers award bonus EQM's for Y/B fares, which is the industry standard for rewarding the big spenders. US no longer does this, so what advantage is there to fly US if you fly alot of expensive short-hauls on Y/B fares?


None. Where they fly, I've moved almost all my shorthaul travel to WN. From one of my home airports, I fly DL or CO or NW.

I fly US when they are the rock-bottom cheapest, not on a shorthaul, and generally only when my other options are not nonstop. So, they've turned me (in a few years) from someone dumping $3-$5k/pop 3x/month for Envoy to only flying them on cock-a-roach fares when they probably lose money carrying my butt around.

Some will tell you, however, that Tempe knows what it is doing.

Most other legacy carriers award bonus EQM's for Y/B fares, which is the industry standard for rewarding the big spenders. US no longer does this, so what advantage is there to fly US if you fly alot of expensive short-hauls on Y/B fares?

Do you guys really choose your airline based on the number of miles you will earn? I've been doing this now for almost ten years and gave up on that years ago. I fly the carrier that makes the most logical sense time-wise and, within reason, cost-wise.

But whatever, I happen to agree with this change and sent US an e-mail supporting it. I'm entitled to my opinion.

Do you guys really choose your airline based on the number of miles you will earn? I've been doing this now for almost ten years and gave up on that years ago. I fly the carrier that makes the most logical sense time-wise and, within reason, cost-wise.

If I am going to pop $800 for a 275 mile trip, you can bet that I will chose the airline which gives me the most miles and segments for the flight, all other things being equal. As noted by ClueByFour I will fly US now only on ultra-low cheap fares which have no equal on another airline (CO, NW, Dl). I will even fly to alternative airports rather than use US. I think one can degrade a product to the point where it is worthless to the customer. US has now reached that milestone with me.