MilesBuzz! - Why do airlines care if you actually fly?

I've always been confused why if you buy a ticket, you can't get the miles if you don't fly. And if you want some extra room on a flight, why can't you buy 2 or 3 seats and stretch out.

If you don't fly, they give your seat away. And you can't get any mileage credit unless you are actually in the air, even though the airlines have your $. Why do they care?

Air travel seems like the only product you can buy, and get charged a fee if you change your mind even 9 months before your flight yet the airlines can change the flight 10 times and you get nothing....

Can anyone offer any logic to this air travel weirdness?

its simple business math.

they want you to pay and not get the miles. im sure not traveling also saves them money. and theyre not going to pass that on to you by giving you miles.

re fees, they vary.

I've always been confused why if you buy a ticket, you can't get the miles if you don't fly. And if you want some extra room on a flight, why can't you buy 2 or 3 seats and stretch out.

If you don't fly, they give your seat away. And you can't get any mileage credit unless you are actually in the air, even though the airlines have your $. Why do they care?

Air travel seems like the only product you can buy, and get charged a fee if you change your mind even 9 months before your flight yet the airlines can change the flight 10 times and you get nothing....

Can anyone offer any logic to this air travel weirdness?

@:-) Good point and something I've wondered about. As you noted, it would seem that the airlines could make more money (indeed squeeze more seats onto each plane) by offering these phantom seats.

You buy your ticket, choose not to fly and you still get miles. It would be just another variation of "buying miles" but in this case "buying RDMs and EQMs".

It seems like a great revenue stream. When you buy your ticket, have a checkbox that says "I'm not actually going on the plane, I want the miles only." Then they can sell the physical seat to someone else.

And if you like 3 seats, you can buy 3 for yourself and stretchout, and they can fill the plane quicker. Why not?

Airline math = bad math, it seems to me :confused:

Good question. Maybe it is to penalize you for not flying and not eating their food on International flights :p:p:p

Just a wild guess:

the airlines want you to buy miles and/or use a co-branded CC because they're really profitable.

Makes it harder to buy elite status. You don't just need the money. You need the money, plus the time, plus the tolerance.

Which is, of course, why some people here wish it weren't so.

Makes it harder to buy elite status. You don't just need the money. You need the money, plus the time, plus the tolerance.

Which is, of course, why some people here wish it weren't so.

But they must realize that some of us chose not to buy tickets because we didn't have the time to fly, but we would have bought the "phantom" tickets just to get the miles, and the airlines would have gotten our $.

Anyway, it seems in this competitive time, that if an airline were to suddenly offer such a convenience, that they would immediately gain a financial advantage, no?

Makes it harder to buy elite status. You don't just need the money. You need the money, plus the time, plus the tolerance.

Airlines arguably need the money more than the collective we do. And in the short term, minting more elites isn't going to hurt them. If each airline simply set aside an additional 10 seats per flight for "Not actually going to fly" seats linked for pricing to the actual inventory, they've created an entirely new revenue stream.

And if they have a lot of elites who have trouble getting upgrades, that forces many to simply buy F fares, adding more revenue.

True, I would certainly have preferred to simply buy my EXP status rather than invest money, time and tolerance. But I would have spent another $2K during the DEQM promotion to also buy UA 1K status.

It seems like a great revenue stream. When you buy your ticket, have a checkbox that says "I'm not actually going on the plane, I want the miles only." Then they can sell the physical seat to someone else.

And if you like 3 seats, you can buy 3 for yourself and stretchout, and they can fill the plane quicker. Why not?

Airline math = bad math, it seems to me :confused:

Actually airline math = good math.

The only people that would do something like this, would get a very high value out of the miles earned. The airlines dont want more miles in FT members hands, it costs them alot more than miles in someone elses hands.

Actually airline math = good math.

If you say so. :rolleyes:
It is exactly that "head in the sand" thinking that has made every US airline except WN a terrible investment and money loser for decades.

Q: How do you make a small fortune in the airline business?
A: Start with a large fortune.

If you say so. :rolleyes:
It is exactly that "head in the sand" thinking that has made every US airline except WN a terrible investment and money losers for decades.

Q: How do you make a small fortune in the airline business?
A: Start with a large fortune.

True. I meant the math in this scenario.

US allows you to buy status outright, but it is usually far less expensive to go through the process of buying tickets and flying.

US-Buy Up to Preferred (http://www.usairways.com/awa/content/dividendmiles/preferred/buy-up-to-preferred.aspx)

You can essentially buy CP (top tier) for just under $4500.

Just a wild guess:

the airlines want you to buy miles and/or use a co-branded CC because they're really profitable.

Exactly. If you got to pick the route from a city you don't live near to any city you choose thousands of miles away, you could get BOTH RDM and EQM for a FAR, FAR lower price than is a typical price due to a temporary fare war between competing airlines. Example is LAX-SYD (RT), which could have been purchased for $500.

And, of course, the FT junkies would grab up the seats just for the dirt cheap price per mile.

US allows you to buy status outright, but it is usually far less expensive to go through the process of buying tickets and flying. You can essentially buy CP (top tier) for just under $4500.

But then you have to fly US. :eek:
Another drink in your plastic glass sir? :D

But then you have to fly US. :eek:
Another drink in your plastic glass sir? :D

And then you don't get to hang out at airports in the middle of the night waiting for a flight just for status.

And if you want some extra room on a flight, why can't you buy 2 or 3 seats and stretch out.

Isn't this possible? I remember someone on FT flying with an instrument that flew on a seperate ticket and even earned FF miles. If you can't buy 3 seats under your name how about adding two seats for a Mr Right and Mr Left. You can buckle your shoes into the sats until after the fasten seatbelt sign goes off and then store them under their respective seatbacks.:D

@:-) Good point and something I've wondered about. As you noted, it would seem that the airlines could make more money (indeed squeeze more seats onto each plane) by offering these phantom seats.

You buy your ticket, choose not to fly and you still get miles. It would be just another variation of "buying miles" but in this case "buying RDMs and EQMs".

But they want to sell them to You at outrageous rates of say 3 cpm, buying and not flying youd be able to purchase them for much less

By Hotels if you dont show up they will charge you and you dont always get Stay credit or pts. However if they end up being sold-out anyway they arent suppose to charge you. would be nice if the Carriers did likewise instead of simply collecting for 154 passengers when they was only 150 seats on the plane to begin with

Airlines don't give miles for not flying for the same reason that they frown on mileage runs. If the policy was different, everyone would simply buy the cheapest tickets to achieve status.

Airlines run frequent flyer programs not cashback programs.

If at some points they decide to switch to "spend $100 get $1 back" schemes I am sure they will gladly issue you an appropriate amount for not flying. I think VX already has that system in place - check with them.

And yes you can certainly buy 2-3 seats for yourself.

The airlines compete with other airlines. When another airline offers a "sale fare" to a particular destination, the airlines matching it often lose money on the fare, but match it to keep the business. However, different airlines connect through different hubs.

In the case of American, for instance, they make a profit off their DFW hub by charging a lot of money for you to get there, knowing that other airlines won't be able to charge less. But then, there is a sale to BOS, so American matches the sale fare. Even though United gets there by connecting through ORD, and Jetblue perhaps through JFK. But many AA flights will connect through DFW. If you book a ticket to BOS and connect through DFW, but then get off at DFW, American will lose money on the DFW flight for which it could have charged you more.

That's why it cares if you don't fly the entire trip.

Airlines arguably need the money more than the collective we do. And in the short term, minting more elites isn't going to hurt them. If each airline simply set aside an additional 10 seats per flight for "Not actually going to fly" seats linked for pricing to the actually inventory, they've created an entirely new revenue stream.



This whole thread is bizarre, but suggesting that the airlines sell seats that won't be used, while limiting the inventory of these phantom seats seems truly insane.

Only on Flyertalk...

And with regard to buying and not flying at all, people would just look for the routes with the cheapest CPM ratio, buy the tickets, and never fly. The airlines make more money from someone in, say, Buttocks Minnesota doing a mileage run from Buttocks than they do if that person were just to scout for cheap LAX-LAS fares and buy tickets on that route whenever the ratio was good, but then never fly the fare.

Or buying a hundred round trips that they never intended to fly, merely because they could get miles at a half cent each. The airlines would rather charge that person 2.5 cents per mile to buy them. And, the more miles that a frequent flyer has, the more liability the airline has on its books. They don't want that. That's why they limit the number of miles per year you can purchase. And that's why they have miles expire if you don't do something with them over time.

If you get miles at a half cent each, without limit, save them, and then spend them years later when their value is 10 cents each, then the airline has a serious profitability problem.

Airlines don't give miles for not flying for the same reason that they frown on mileage runs.

Do you have any evidence that airlines actually frown on mileage runs?

If you get miles at a half cent each, without limit, save them, and then spend them years later when their value is 10 cents each, then the airline has a serious profitability problem.

I believe that horse has already left the barn.

And if you want some extra room on a flight, why can't you buy 2 or 3 seats and stretch out.


You can definitely do that. The extra seat is usually booked under the name EXTRASEAT (PAX LASTNAME).

For the extra seat, you usually earn redeemable miles but not elite-qualifying miles, since EQMs are essentially limited to miles actually flown, and you actually flew that flight only once (and earned EQMs on your first seat).

Do you have any evidence that airlines actually frown on mileage runs?Only anecdotal -- comments made by supervisors, GAs, etc.

Only anecdotal -- comments made by supervisors, GAs, etc.

Earning miles for tickets purchased and not flown would actually cause a bigger problem for airlines than current "mileage runs," since currently mileage runners are limited to the fares in their home markets or markets to which they can find cheap "positioning flights." If you could earn miles for tickets not flown, not only would more people do "mileage runs," but mileage runners would also be buying the cheapest possible tickets between random city pairs (e.g. city pairs where the airline was publishing very low fares because of intense competition). And the "concentration" of phantom MRers on the cheapest routes would mean that on some days, the fully sold plane might go out half-empty because of the phantom MRers...and the local customers that the airline was trying to compete for would actually go and fly another airline instead because this airline's flight was "sold out."

You can definitely do that. The extra seat is usually booked under the name EXTRASEAT (PAX LASTNAME).

For the extra seat, you usually earn redeemable miles but not elite-qualifying miles, since EQMs are essentially limited to miles actually flown, and you actually flew that flight only once (and earned EQMs on your first seat).

I thought if you don't check the ticket in, they give up the seat to other people waiting. If you want an extra seat, you just give them both tickets when checking in?

The argument against "phantom seats" is interesting, that people would just buy the cheapest connections with the best mileage per dollar. But even tough I haven't done the math myself, I still find it hard to believe that "phantom seats" would not be profitable for the airline.

Each mile is worth less and less, what we can get with our miles, blackout dates, benefits of elite status, etc. Is it really worth denying the purchase of tickets that require no seats or service, just to avoid giving the miles? Are there a lot of flights that are so cheap, they are worth more in miles than the price of a non-flying passenger?

I suppose it's possible, but it seems kinda hard to believe in most cases. I think in most cases, flyers like us are trying to reach an elite level, and we would fly that extra flight at the end of the year, but don't have the time to sit on the plane for no other reason. If they give us the option to buy that ticket and not fly, it would *seem* worth it for them.

Only anecdotal -- comments made by supervisors, GAs, etc.

Rubbish. The AC Angels and FAs that I met during my 3 weeks of SFO/LAX-BOS runs were amused and understanding, but most of all, sincerely appreciative for my business and my commitment to AA.

I thought if you don't check the ticket in, they give up the seat to other people waiting. If you want an extra seat, you just give them both tickets when checking in?

Yes, you have to check in for the extra seats. Give the check-in agent both tickets (or record locators, with e-ticket), or use OLCI, etc.

You also need to boarding passes for the extra seats to get mileage credit (RDMs) afterwards. At least on UA, the mileage credit for the extra seats is not automatic--you have to fax them in, with your MP# to post the miles to.


The argument against "phantom seats" is interesting, that people would just buy the cheapest connections with the best mileage per dollar. But even tough I haven't done the math myself, I still find it hard to believe that "phantom seats" would not be profitable for the airline.

Most of the people who would have bought "phantom seats" currently have to do "real" mileage runs instead, and thus pay the airline more money because they are buying more expensive tickets out of their home market (or nearby market) instead of buying whatever random city pairs had the cheapest cpm.

Rubbish. The AC Angels and FAs that I met during my 3 weeks of SFO/LAX-BOS runs were amused and understanding, but most of all, sincerely appreciative for my business and my commitment to AA.

It really varies by agent. There have been at least a few reports on FT of CSRs/GAs who refused to rebook mileage runners to their purchased destination during IRROPS, instead sending them back to their origin airport, because the agent said that the seats on the remaining flights to the destintaion city were needed for passengers flying "real" itineraries.

At least on UA, the mileage credit for the extra seats is not automatic--you have to fax them in, with your MP# to post the miles to.Wow, have you actually done that successfully?

I was under the impression that no airline was known
to give any miles of any kind for the second seat,
which always seemed a bit unfair.

If so, even if only RDMs, not EQMs,
did status bonus apply?

I would like to hear more of specific cases
where this has been done. Thanks in advance.

I believe that horse has already left the barn.

Well, more of one than they currently have.

Rubbish. The AC Angels and FAs that I met during my 3 weeks of SFO/LAX-BOS runs were amused and understanding, but most of all, sincerely appreciative for my business and my commitment to AA.Gee, you must be right. Your three weeks of MRs on AA definitely proves that what I've experienced never happened.

I would never have known if you hadn't told me.

Thanks!

It really varies by agent. There have been at least a few reports on FT of CSRs/GAs who refused to rebook mileage runners to their purchased destination during IRROPS, instead sending them back to their origin airport, because the agent said that the seats on the remaining flights to the destintaion city were needed for passengers flying "real" itineraries.Sorry, CollegeFlyer, but you must be wrong as well. SFO777 has proven, beyond all doubt, that what we've experienced didn't happen.

Good thing he's around!

Each mile is worth less and lessAnd that would accelerate exponentially if people could earn both RDM and EQM without flying. The actual hassle of flying is the only thing keeping mileage-runners from accumulating even more miles than they currently do. RDM are already being given away nearly for free via credit cards and various other promotions... EQM are getting there, given the current DEQM/TEQM promos. If people could get more of both without flying at all, the entire system would become worthless within months.

Sorry, CollegeFlyer, but you must be wrong as well. SFO777 has proven, beyond all doubt, that what we've experienced didn't happen.

Good thing he's around!

I had the same experience as SFO777. I started a thread that shares what happened to me (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/950347-fa-thanks-mrers.html) on my first MR.

And just because a GA doesn't play onto muti-seg runs during IRREGOPs doesn't prove an airline "frowns" upon MRs. They are busy trying to reroute a plane full of people, they don't have time to help me fiqure out how reroute a flight from LAS-LAX via SEA, NYC and JAX.

And that would accelerate exponentially if people could earn both RDM and EQM without flying. The actual hassle of flying is the only thing keeping mileage-runners from accumulating even more miles than they currently do. RDM are already being given away nearly for free via credit cards and various other promotions... EQM are getting there, given the current DEQM/TEQM promos. If people could get more of both without flying at all, the entire system would become worthless within months.

I'm sure you're right. I mean, the best argument against "phantom seats" is that the airlines don't allow them. If the airlines don't allow something, it's 99% certain to be a better deal for us.

Still seems funny though. They'll let you make any itinerary you want and get the miles for it, but if you happen to not want to sit in the seat, then you can't buy the ticket.

Definitely one of the stranger FT threads.....

Can I ask what would elite status be worth if this was the case? That way, any Joe could purchase the cheapest CPM seats they could find, not get on the flight, and earn top tier status for cheap. Good for the passenger, perhaps, not so much for the airline. It costs a lot of money for an airline to run their elite programs. While it may seem like the benefits are "free" to you as a customer, the company definitely doesn't see it that way. They have to pay a lot of money to give out and maintain those benefits for customers. Giving it away to anyone who is willing to invest a couple of hours in booking phantom seats isn't really in their interests. It would also likely mean reduced benefits for all elite flyers.

Besides, what would be the point of allowing me to buy the status if I don't fly anyway. Plus, why would I want to buy these phantom seats if I don't fly that carrier to take advantage of the benefits. If I didn't fly UA, what would be my incentive to be a 1K? TO take advantage of the 1K line, and E+ seats for the 1 short-haul RT I might do that year? On DL, just so I could get a free upgrade on 1 transcon? Doesn't seem worth it to me - that upgrade, if I could even snatch it, isn't really "free" - it cost me all the $ on booking those phantom flights.

Secondly, the air travel industry is most certainly not the only one in which you have to pay to change/cancel a purchase before you actually use a product/service. If I put down a down payment to buy a house, and then decide I don't want it anymore, I would probably lose the amount of that down payment, or a significant portion of it. If I want to book a hall for an event like a wedding or bar mitzvah party, I'd almost certainly have to put down a deposit that would be non-refundable.

And just because a GA doesn't play onto muti-seg runs during IRREGOPs doesn't prove an airline "frowns" upon MRs. They are busy trying to reroute a plane full of people, they don't have time to help me fiqure out how reroute a flight from LAS-LAX via SEA, NYC and JAX.

That's not at all what I said. The GAs/CSRs refused to get the MR pax to their ticketed destination at all. For example, the pax was flying something like JFK-IAD-SFO-SEA-SFO-IAD-JFK, and during IRROPS delaying IAD-SFO after the first segment, the IAD CSR refused to book the pax to SEA at all, by any routing, instead saying that she would only book the passenger straight back to JFK or LGA, because the transcon flight(s) that the pax had paid for were needed for pax flying "real" itineraries and not MRs.

Wow, have you actually done that successfully?

I was under the impression that no airline was known
to give any miles of any kind for the second seat,
which always seemed a bit unfair.

I haven't, but others on FT have. If you do an FT-wide search (or search within the UA forum) for extra seat miles or travel with instrument, you should find the threads. It might not be in the first few matches, though.

I would never have known if you hadn't told me.

Well apparently not, so I'm happy to educate.

By mileage running, I am choosing to commit the bulk of my travel to one airline, AA. I spent $3,500 to "buy" my EXP status thru February 2011. And in the next 20 months, will likely spend another $20K on AA. In return, AA grants me top-tier status with full benefits and assures my loyalty for a long time.

So that's $20K+ that AA would have never received. By all means, snipe all you want about anecdotal evidence from a few grumpy rank-and-file CSRs and GAs, but at $20K a pop, common sense says what airline wouldn't embrace MRs?

Wow, have you actually done that successfully?
I was under the impression that no airline was known to give any miles of any kind for the second seat, which always seemed a bit unfair.

If so, even if only RDMs, not EQMs, did status bonus apply?

I would like to hear more of specific cases where this has been done. Thanks in advance.

This guy was able to do it on DL. Pretty interesting story...
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-skymiles/892084-intl-upgrade-first-coach-t-purchased-seat.html

I spent $3,500 to "buy" my EXP status thru February 2011. And in the next 20 months, will likely spend another $20K on AA. In return, AA grants me top-tier status with full benefits and assures my loyalty for a long time.

By all means, snipe all you want about anecdotal evidence from a few grumpy rank-and-file CSRs and GAs, but at $20K a pop, common sense says what airline wouldn't embrace MRs?

It's the "$20K a pop" that is anecdotal evidence in this situation.

The vast majority of mileage runners that post on FT about their MRs are not spending $20K a pop with the airline, and are doing MRs specifically to achieve and retain status for much less than that.

It's the "$20K a pop" that is anecdotal evidence in this situation.

The vast majority of mileage runners that post on FT about their MRs are not spending $20K a pop with the airline, and are doing MRs specifically to achieve and retain status for much less than that.

And what does your anecdotal evidence tell you that the vast majority of mileage runners will spend in the next 20 months? :D

if you happen to not want to sit in the seat, then you can't buy the ticket.No, you can absolutely buy the ticket, whether or not you actually plan to fly. You just can't earn the miles unless you fly... but you're welcome to buy the ticket regardless.

US allows you to buy status outright, but it is usually far less expensive to go through the process of buying tickets and flying.

US-Buy Up to Preferred (http://www.usairways.com/awa/content/dividendmiles/preferred/buy-up-to-preferred.aspx)

You can essentially buy CP (top tier) for just under $4500.

So, what is the point of buying when if someone don't even have much time to fly? If the purpose is to have a status and get upgrades, would it be more cost effective to buy premium tickets for this end?

And what does your anecdotal evidence tell you that the vast majority of mileage runners will spend in the next 20 months? :D

Back up. Your initial claim, in the first place, was the following:

By all means, snipe all you want about anecdotal evidence from a few grumpy rank-and-file CSRs and GAs, but at $20K a pop, common sense says what airline wouldn't embrace MRs?

This assumes that most, or a substantial number, of MRers are spending $20K a pop with the airline (for the "common sense" to apply). But you have not provided any evidence that most, some, or even any other MRers besides yourself spend so much. Can you provide any?

Your claim simultaneously criticizes PTravel for using anecdotal evidence, so I hope you have some non-anecdotal evidence that mileage runners spend $20K a pop. But I'm guessing that no one has statistical evidence of that, so anecdotal evidence will have to suffice. But (1) you still need more anecdotal evidence than just 1 person, i.e. yourself, and (2) you probably should not criticize others for using anecdotal evidence in the first place if your evidence is also anecdotal.

I note also that:
(1) "Common sense" actually says that $20K per 1-2 years is enough to qualify for status, so people spending this much would not need to go on mileage runs, except for the one year right before they start spending $20K per 1-2 years.
(2) The 20-month range you specified also applies only to MRers who qualify for status by March or April of the first year; otherwise, they will not have 20 months of elite status, and their spending on the airline in the period after their status expires cannot be properly attributed to the status which no longer exists.
(3) You've also stated that none of your $20K would have been spent on AA if not for your MRs, but this is not necessarily the general case either. Other MRers often choose their MR airline based on convenient service at their home city, most common destination, or other factors, which would cause them to book some flights on that airline anyway, so it's not the MR/elite status that brings in the passenger's entire revenue to the airline. If they weren't doing MRs at all, they would probably book travel with whatever airline was most convenient for them, or whichever airline they had the best status with (sans MR)--neither of these factors suggests that the airline that they spent $20K on after mileage runs would normally receive $0 of their business.

In other words, you've defined a very specific situation to use as your proof, so it's important that you be able to provide evidence that other mileage runners (in addition to yourself) fit this pattern, in order to make the claim that it's "common sense" that airlines approve of mileage runs.

It's the "$20K a pop" that is anecdotal evidence in this situation.

The vast majority of mileage runners that post on FT about their MRs are not spending $20K a pop with the airline, and are doing MRs specifically to achieve and retain status for much less than that.

And what does your anecdotal evidence tell you that the vast majority of mileage runners will spend in the next 20 months? :rolleyes:

Gee, you must be right. Your three weeks of MRs on AA definitely proves that what I've experienced never happened.

I would never have known if you hadn't told me.

Thanks!

I'm with you. My experience is that generally speaking FAs, GAs, etc., sort of frown on mileage running. They tend to less excited to help you in an irregular ops situation when they look at your ticket and you paid $120 to fly across the country making 6 stops along the way.

So, what is the point of buying when if someone don't even have much time to fly? If the purpose is to have a status and get upgrades, would it be more cost effective to buy premium tickets for this end?

The problem most often comes towards the end of the year, when someone has 24,800 miles and is just short of elite status. Or if I want to get an award ticket for 50,000 miles, but I only have 49,800 miles in my account. I could buy a $300 ticket and fly, but wasting a whole day or two didn't seem worth it to me at the time.

But I'm still not convinced that buying "phantom" tickets would always be bad for the airline. It's very hard to find a ticket that is worth the dollars just in miles alone. They say each mile is worth 2 cents, but with blackout dates and decreased seating, I end up spending more miles than the equivalent cost of the ticket.

If I have to use 50,000 miles to travel to europe, but buying the ticket costs $750, my miles are really only worth 1.5 cents in this case. In some cases, you can't even get that many cents for your miles.

A flight from CLE to SFO, $500 is a pretty good deal. But I only get 4,300 miles by flying so each mile costs me around 11 cents. I mean, wouldn't the flight have to be less than $85 for the airline to lose $ on giving you these 4,300 miles?

I can't say for sure if the airlines would lose or gain $ by offering "phantom" seats, but I think the cases where you actually spend less $ than the miles end up being worth are pretty rare. My guess is that the airlines could create a new market for seats that didn't exist before.

That's not at all what I said. The GAs/CSRs refused to get the MR pax to their ticketed destination at all. For example, the pax was flying something like JFK-IAD-SFO-SEA-SFO-IAD-JFK, and during IRROPS delaying IAD-SFO after the first segment, the IAD CSR refused to book the pax to SEA at all, by any routing, instead saying that she would only book the passenger straight back to JFK or LGA, because the transcon flight(s) that the pax had paid for were needed for pax flying "real" itineraries and not MRs.

Almost happened to me. In my case, I told the GA I needed to drop off an important document for someone whose waiting for me at the xxx airport and she bought the story. In another case, I missed my flight and had to wait 6 hours for the next flight. So I ask for an indirect route, going through a 3rd city. GA argue that going that way would mean arriving even later than waiting 6 hours. So I said I hate this airport and want to get out of here ASAP. She obliged. I got an extra 2000 miles out of that.

Almost happened to me. In my case, I told the GA I needed to drop off an important document for someone whose waiting for me at the xxx airport and she bought the story.

Good for you. However, a more power-tripping GA might have demanded to see the document.


In another case, I missed my flight and had to wait 6 hours for the next flight. So I ask for an indirect route, going through a 3rd city. GA argue that going that way would mean arriving even later than waiting 6 hours. So I said I hate this airport and want to get out of here ASAP. She obliged. I got an extra 2000 miles out of that.
Good thinking. :D

It's very hard to find a ticket that is worth the dollars just in miles alone.
True for RDMs. Not true for EQMs. For the most part, that is what the Mileage Run Deals forum is all about--finding tickets that are worth the EQMs alone, or the EQM+RDM combo, even though they are rarely worth it for the RDMs alone.

But I'm still not convinced that buying "phantom" tickets would always be bad for the airline.

Stepping away from the talk of MRs abusing a policy of awarding RDMs and EQMs, there are some hypothetical situations involving said “phantom” tickets that I could foresee being extremely profitable for airlines...especially in these economic times.

As I am sure most of you have witnessed, early-bird or red-eye flights have a tendency to take off with far less than sold-out status. Common knowledge indicates that an airline that operates said flight has decreased profitability, and is in all likelihood losing money on such a flight. About 48 hours prior to departure, this airline would make the remaining seats on said flight available for purchase. However, as is typical with any flight within 48 hours of departure, the only fares available for purchase is first or business class, and an exception is placed on this flight to allow purchase of a seat without the requirement of flying.

This way, the airline is booking a seat and receiving revenue for that seat that would have otherwise not existed, while the “flyer” is (potentially) receiving a first-class EQM bonus, RDMs, EQS, etc. Chances are since the available seat is being offered at first or business class fare, potential “phantom” buyers would be dissuaded; but the opportunity would exist nonetheless.

While this might be a long-term liability for that airline in regards to the increase in RDM that can be used on future redemptions, the fact remains that the airline is increasing short-term profitability through a revenue stream that would have otherwise not existed. Who really cares if that airline were to then resell the purchased seat at the gate (or otherwise).

I’m not saying that all airline tickets should be credited if the buyer decides not to fly; but there are situations involving "phantom" tickets that could provide a win-win situation for all parties involved...

And what does your anecdotal evidence tell you that the vast majority of mileage runners will spend in the next 20 months? :rolleyes:

Please read my response in post #48 before recopying and pasting your reply to my post #44 and :rolleyes: again. Thank you.

I could spend 20 minutes piecing together threads illustrating the amounts that FT mileage runners spend after achieving status...but you were the one initially making the claim that "at $20K a pop, common sense says what airline wouldn't embrace MRs?" So, if you want anyone to believe your claim, you need to provide some evidence, in the first place, that mileage runners are generally/usually/often worth $20K a pop to airlines (in order to conclude that common sense indicates that airlines embrace mileage runs).

Rather than simply assert the claim as fact, and challenge everyone who disagrees with you to conclusively disprove your claim. Particularly where you have provided no evidence beyond a statement of your individual travel pattern in one year, and where you have simultaneously criticized a prior poster (PTravel) for relying on only anecdotal evidence in drawing his conclusions.

No malice intended, of course. But otherwise, it would be too easy to state a random claim as fact, and argue that it must be true because no one who disagrees is able to (or willing to spend the time to) conclusively disprove it using non-anecdotal evidence.

Well apparently not, so I'm happy to educate.

By mileage running, I am choosing to commit the bulk of my travel to one airline, AA. I spent $3,500 to "buy" my EXP status thru February 2011. And in the next 20 months, will likely spend another $20K on AA. In return, AA grants me top-tier status with full benefits and assures my loyalty for a long time.

So that's $20K+ that AA would have never received. By all means, snipe all you want about anecdotal evidence from a few grumpy rank-and-file CSRs and GAs, but at $20K a pop, common sense says what airline wouldn't embrace MRs?
Ever notice how many people use the term "common sense," when they really mean "my opinion"? In this case, your "common sense" is neither and, moreover, nor any kind of justification for your earlier rude and arrogant post.

there are situations involving "phantom" tickets that could provide a win-win situation for all parties involved...But a major loss for the parties not involved, namely the millions of other flyers whose miles are now devalued because a few select people snagged millions of miles by buying cheapo "phantom" seats.

Why do you think award prices have been going up and it's so much harder to find award seats? Capacity is shrinking, yes, but award inventory isn't going down faster than capacity... it's keeping pace. The reason that awards seem so rare these days is because too many people have too many miles (thanks largely to over-generous credit card offers, and especially churning of such, but also to other promos) and are able to snag too many award seats, leaving the "regular folk" with very little availability. Somehow, it seems to me that trying to fix the problem of "the value of miles is decreasing" by asking to purchase lots more miles quite cheaply (without even flying) is exactly the wrong solution. It's like trying to fix inflation by printing more money.

It's been said before, but it's worth repeating: airlines are running frequent traveler programs, not schemes for mileage-to-cash arbitrage.

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8830/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/105)

Airlines don't give miles for not flying for the same reason that they frown on mileage runs.

Do you have any evidence that airlines actually frown on mileage runs?

Yes. Delta's Revenue Management group. They have actively searched out MRers in the past and even changed the T&C od SkyMiles at one point to prohibit circuitous routings, though they don't catch most folks.

... then they would make it too easy to arbitrage RDMs for the really expensive and highly profitable tickets that the airlines aren't selling nearly enough of compared to the past; whereas right now the hours of labor in actually flying tickets to earn RDMs prevents people from actually applying this arbitrage principle.

For example:

270,000 RDMs is sufficent to redeem for a standard (last-seat-availability) first class award on a three-class aircraft from North America to Europe on United. A standard award rather than discount award is effectively equivalent to a fully-refundable fully changeable revenue ticket. That ticket if purchased might easily price out at $13,500, so 5 cents per RDM redeemed. I usually ridicule any such calculation of how much a mile is really worth, but for this discussion's sake, suppose that I really am somebody who is willing to spend $13,500 on such a ticket.

Now, I know from experience recently that I've booked various SFO-IAD round-trip tickets on United for $260 all-inclusive due to competition with Virgin America; and that this fare was quite readily available on numerous flights. With United Premier Executive 100% RDM bonus, that's about 9,600 RDMs, so 2.7 cents per RDM. It's possible to do better with other routes during fare sales; suppose we approximate that by assuming that SFO-IAD round-trip tickets were on sale for $130 all-inclusive, so 1.35 cents per RDM.

So, I can in theory earn enough RDMs by flying just slightly over 28 SFO-IAD-SFO round trips (cost: $3,640 during an amazing fare sale) to redeem for a standard first class award (value: $13,500, keeping in mind that the supposition is that I would have been willing to spend cash on this ticket so that's really its value to me). But I'd also have to burn something like 28 * (5 hours eastbound + 6 hours westbound) = 308 hours in the air, plus many more hours on the ground. Counting just the hours in the air, actually flying 28 SFO-IAD-SFO round trips to earn those RDMs to save the difference in cash outlay would net to "saving" approx. $32 per hour spent mileage running.

I think anybody who would be willing to spend $13,500 cash for a first-class round-trip ticket from North America to Europe wouldn't be eager to try to save money by spending 308 hours mileage running. But, if it were possible to buy a ticket and earn the EQMs and RDMs without actually flying it, it would make perfect sense for a personal assistant to be told that they have to make the phantom bookings to earn the 270,000 RDMs in order to book that first class round trip ticket; no sweat off the actual flyer's back.

I think anybody who would be willing to spend $13,500 cash for a first-class round-trip ticket from North America to Europe wouldn't be eager to try to save money by spending 308 hours mileage running. But, if it were possible to buy a ticket and earn the EQMs and RDMs without actually flying it, it would make perfect sense for a personal assistant to be told that they have to make the phantom bookings to earn the 270,000 RDMs in order to book that first class round trip ticket; no sweat off the actual flyer's back.

Actually, this suggests a different option: hire someone at minimum wage to fly those miles for you. They get paid to travel somewhere, and then use the RDM's for your first-class ticket.

Plus, it helps with the unemployment rate :p

Actually, this suggests a different option: hire someone at minimum wage to fly those miles for you. They get paid to travel somewhere, and then use the RDM's for your first-class ticket.

You would also have to hire someone with the same name as you OR have them commit fraud by using a forged government ID. So that doesn't work either.

You would also have to hire someone with the same name as you OR have them commit fraud by using a forged government ID. So that doesn't work either.

Well, no, they can just earn miles in their own name and redeem them for a ticket in your name. Which is basically what people do when they sell miles on eBay.

It would be a violation of airline rules (since you'd essentially be "buying miles" from someone else's account), but it wouldn't require a forged government ID or criminal fraud.

Also, the cpm ratio wouldn't be as good anyway because you'd have to pay for another ticket to "position" your mileage runner to the origin city that the super cheap fare is available from (and you can't just have 10 different mileage runners based in 10 different cities, unless you want the miles to be divided across 10 accounts as well). Whereas with "phantom seat" miles you could buy the phantom tickets between any cheap city pairs without worrying about actually getting to/from those cities.

Well, no, they can just earn miles in their own name and redeem them for a ticket in your name.

Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind. Note that the original calculation would change a bit since the Professional-Seat-Warmer wouldn't be 1P, presumably. Unless there are unemployed 1P's who are really bored.

Also, the cpm ratio wouldn't be as good anyway because you'd have to pay for another ticket to "position" your mileage runner to the origin city that the super cheap fare is available from to/from those cities.

I'm not sure this is a big problem, since some of these fares go to/from pretty populous cities (IAD-SFO, in the example above). But it could be an issue in general.

I'm not sure this is a big problem, since some of these fares go to/from pretty populous cities (IAD-SFO, in the example above). But it could be an issue in general.

True. I bought a RT ticket IAD-LAX with 4 days notice for travel June 5-7, 2009 (Friday-Sunday, no less) for $197.20. I also received $600 + a DBC Free ticket for 2 bumps on the return trip, so essentially UA paid me to fly.

Actually, this suggests a different option: hire someone at minimum wage to fly those miles for you. They get paid to travel somewhere, and then use the RDM's for your first-class ticket.

Plus, it helps with the unemployment rate :pOf course, there's that little detail of finding someone with your name or getting him/her a fake ID.

All this talk of phantom tickets and people buying status has overlooked an important point:

If the number of elites swelled, the guys who are the "genuine" elites that the airlines really want and value (the ones who fly on premium tickets and generate significant revenues for the airlines) would begin to get upset with the difficulty of using their benefits.

What good is "preboarding" if half the plan has a silver card? What good is lounge access if the lounges are overcrowded?

Next thing you know, you find yourself in a revenue-based model (which has already happened when you look at programmes like United Global Services or the way points are structured in BA's programme). And you'll find your high-revenue flyers defecting to carriers that reward big spenders, and those that allow lots of people to buy status as bus-in-the-sky services.

The problem with elite status is: you need elites, but not too many, or the whole concept of elite falls apart.

It would be a violation of airline rules (since you'd essentially be "buying miles" from someone else's account), but it wouldn't require a forged government ID or criminal fraud.

I woudl need to read the conditions carefully, but provided you were paying for the ticket to travel (rather than the award ticket), and they were to gift you the award tickets, you might be able to stay within the letter of the law (if not the spirit).

Also, the cpm ratio wouldn't be as good anyway because you'd have to pay for another ticket to "position" your mileage runner to the origin city that the super cheap fare is available from (and you can't just have 10 different mileage runners based in 10 different cities, unless you want the miles to be divided across 10 accounts as well). Whereas with "phantom seat" miles you could buy the phantom tickets between any cheap city pairs without worrying about actually getting to/from those cities.

This problem is solved easily enough by hiring people locally.

Of course, there's that little detail of finding someone with your name or getting him/her a fake ID.

Nope, that is a misunderstanding of what I suggested. You don't get the EQM's, you just get the RDM's. That means there is no need to share a name.

You pay for them to fly. They "gift" you the RDM's. As the calculation above by pshuang suggested, this can result in substantial savings.

I think the real issue is just one of crunching the numbers. Plus most people, even on FT, probably have better things to do with our lives :)

I woudl need to read the conditions carefully, but provided you were paying for the ticket to travel (rather than the award ticket), and they were to gift you the award tickets, you might be able to stay within the letter of the law (if not the spirit).

This technical distinction won't save the technique...when the "law" is airline FFP terms, the spirit is all that matters. Usually, eBay mileage buyers are also not paying for the miles, but only for the seller's "travel advice" on how to use the miles that the seller gives the buyer as a free gift; or the seller is selling a $400 white envelope that just "happens to contain" a paper SWU. But UA busts the sellers and buyers all the time, regardless of the language they have used in structuring the transaction.


This problem is solved easily enough by hiring people locally.
Not really..as I noted previously,

you can't just have 10 different mileage runners based in 10 different cities, unless you want the miles to be divided across 10 accounts as well.

Almost happened to me. In my case, I told the GA I needed to drop off an important document for someone whose waiting for me at the xxx airport and she bought the story. In another case, I missed my flight and had to wait 6 hours for the next flight. So I ask for an indirect route, going through a 3rd city. GA argue that going that way would mean arriving even later than waiting 6 hours. So I said I hate this airport and want to get out of here ASAP. She obliged. I got an extra 2000 miles out of that.

Man, you've got balls!

US allows you to buy status outright, but it is usually far less expensive to go through the process of buying tickets and flying.

US-Buy Up to Preferred (http://www.usairways.com/awa/content/dividendmiles/preferred/buy-up-to-preferred.aspx)

You can essentially buy CP (top tier) for just under $4500.

Huh, that's not entirely crazy. You get four transcontinental upgrades to first class -- if you were going to buy those tickets for cash they would be worth nearly that much anyways.

And *A Gold only costs half that....

I guess airlines do not want us to earn miles on two flights at the same time . :( .

So, I can in theory earn enough RDMs by flying just slightly over 28 SFO-IAD-SFO round trips (cost: $3,640 during an amazing fare sale) to redeem for a standard first class award (value: $13,500, keeping in mind that the supposition is that I would have been willing to spend cash on this ticket so that's really its value to me). But I'd also have to burn something like 28 * (5 hours eastbound + 6 hours westbound) = 308 hours in the air, plus many more hours on the ground. Counting just the hours in the air, actually flying 28 SFO-IAD-SFO round trips to earn those RDMs to save the difference in cash outlay would net to "saving" approx. $32 per hour spent mileage running.

I think anybody who would be willing to spend $13,500 cash for a first-class round-trip ticket from North America to Europe wouldn't be eager to try to save money by spending 308 hours mileage running. But, if it were possible to buy a ticket and earn the EQMs and RDMs without actually flying it, it would make perfect sense for a personal assistant to be told that they have to make the phantom bookings to earn the 270,000 RDMs in order to book that first class round trip ticket; no sweat off the actual flyer's back.

One could also buy 270k miles direct from UA for approximately $8882 + 7.5% tax, but there is no EQM benefit. Your example neglects assigning any value to EQM accrual.

I'm with you. My experience is that generally speaking FAs, GAs, etc., sort of frown on mileage running. They tend to less excited to help you in an irregular ops situation when they look at your ticket and you paid $120 to fly across the country making 6 stops along the way.

"Generally speaking" is a great way to water down one's argument.

During the recent BOS-LAX MR frenzy I had just flown a postioning flight to LAX and my redeye to Boston was delayed. I was scheduled to be on the first BOS-LAX flight the next morning so I was worried. I mentioned my problem to the GA and she told me the flight would probably be OK.

An hour or so later they had changed planes and it looked like we would make it to BOS with about 30 minutes to spare.

As I was chatting with SFO777 I heard my name called and hoping against hope that I cleared an upgrade I went to the counter. (I didn't) The same GA told me that she had checked me in for the BOS-LAX flight and handed me my two boarding cards for my BOS-LAX-BOS for the next day and told me "I'll see you tommorrow when you pass through again."

When we landed there was a mad dash of about 12 FTers running through BOS. I told the GA there were several people behind me because our flight was delayed. She just laughed and said "I know, I'm holding the flight so all of you can go back to LAX."


Clearly two more AA staff who did not frown on MRs. They knew exactly what I/we were up to.

... Clearly two more AA staff who did not frown on MRs. They knew exactly what I/we were up to.There are a lot of those. The EXP desk agent who asked me a few years back (before I dropped to PLT :( ) if I wanted to route a BOS-LHR trip through ORD for the miles, at the same fare, was another. (Note to those who knew both of us back in the day: This was not the agent I knew personally.)

Of course, neither my personal experience nor that of anyone else here proves which type is in the majority. I doubt that even the combined experience of everyone posting in this thread could.

snip...
Of course, neither my personal experience nor that of anyone else here proves which type is in the majority. I doubt that even the combined experience of everyone posting in this thread could.
The point is that everyone arguing on both sides of the "do airlines like mileage runs/runners" (PTravel, SFO777, CollegeFlyer, SBM12, Gamecock) is using anecdotal evidence (and usually presenting it as fact) and dispariaging the opposition for doing the same thing. :rolleyes:

The point is that everyone arguing on both sides of the "do airlines like mileage runs/runners" (PTravel, SFO777, CollegeFlyer, SBM12, Gamecock) is using anecdotal evidence (and usually presenting it as fact) and dispariaging the opposition for doing the same thing. :rolleyes:

"anecdotal evidence" was fact on three seperate instances that I posted. It seems you are the one dispariaging that we tell who we were clearly thanked and facilitated by AA staff.

I doubt there is a AA corporate policy on MRs, unless you want to take a look at the fact that for a short time earlier this year they encouraged them by offering DBEQMs and 3xmiles.:rolleyes:

The point is that everyone arguing on both sides of the "do airlines like mileage runs/runners" (PTravel, SFO777, CollegeFlyer, SBM12, Gamecock) is using anecdotal evidence (and usually presenting it as fact) and dispariaging the opposition for doing the same thing. :rolleyes:

1. Anecdotal evidence is fact. But it's a kind of fact that is much less persuasive than statistical evidence, scientific proof, or (in this case) an official policy statement from the airline.

2. I didn't disparage people "for using anecdotal evidence." What I said about anecdotal evidence is that SFO777 should not be criticizing other people for using anecdotal evidence when his own claim was based exclusively on anecdotal evidence as well:

But I'm guessing that no one has statistical evidence of that, so anecdotal evidence will have to suffice. But (1) you still need more anecdotal evidence than just 1 person, i.e. yourself, and (2) you probably should not criticize others for using anecdotal evidence in the first place if your evidence is also anecdotal.

So, please do not :rolleyes: at me for things I did not say.

Interesting thread. I have wondered the same thing when I have bought a truly nonrefundable ticket I am subsequently unable to use at all.

Here's my experience. On my first and only MR, I was to fly from Panama to Alaska in order to end up in BC. I got distracted by the time change and new terminals at SEA, took a thrombosis break walk and returning to my gate in time to wave goodbye to the tail of the plane. My suitcase flew to Anchorage in the overhead. The airline actually tried to accomodate me by rerouting to another airline (I admitted it was a mileage run), but I would have misconnected on the return, so instead they retrieved my bag in ANC and sent it back to me. I DID get credit for the flight, possibly because I already had my boarding pass or else it was an oversight.

On occasions where I have been forced to abandon the last leg of a flight, I have notified the airline so that they COULD release the seat to someone else, even though in one case I had the boarding pass already. I didn't get credit for that leg, but also didn't suffer any backlash for the rest of the miles earned for having missed the flight.

So does anyone know if having received the boarding pass (at the airport, anyway) affects whether or not you would get credit for flights not flown?

I think I've posted this before elsewhere, but in the mid-1980s, I used to do Eastern Airlines MRs (segment runs, really) when they had flights from FLL-MIA and back. I was able to ensure that I got elite status (Executive Traveler) every year. Eventually, I realized that if instead of actually taking the flight I just showed up at the gate, gave my ticket to the GA, went as far as the jetway, then turned around and left the airport, it worked just as well as taking the flight.

This is something that one could *never* get away with now, and would probably cause a security alert. But there was much more you could do at that time that you can't do now!

So does anyone know if having received the boarding pass (at the airport, anyway) affects whether or not you would get credit for flights not flown?

My experience with AA is that I do not get credit until they actually scan the boarding pass as I enter the jetway. I presume that if you are on a flight with a single flight number and a connection point, and they let you stay on the plane, but you leave and miss getting back before the plane takes off, you will still get credit for the flight because there was no expectation that your BP would be scanned a second time.

One could also buy 270k miles direct from UA for approximately $8882 + 7.5% tax, but there is no EQM benefit. Your example neglects assigning any value to EQM accrual.

My example analyzes the situation from the POV of somebody willing to pay $13,500 cash for a first-class ticket. Under any of the scenarios I compared, he or she wouldn't earn EQMs, so their valuation of EQMs is a moot point for comparing the scenarios against each other.

As for simply purchasing 270K miles from UA, I suspect that preventing this arbitrage is a major reason why there's a 60K per year cap on purchasing miles directly from UA. Sure, there are probably any number of ways to try to get around that cap -- like making a large number of employees each buy 60K miles and gift it to you, and then allow them to expense the cost -- but UA doesn't have to make it impossible, just unpalatable for somebody who would be willing to spend $13,500 cash on a first class ticket to make the effort.

My example analyzes the situation from the POV of somebody willing to pay $13,500 cash for a first-class ticket. Under any of the scenarios I compared, he or she wouldn't earn EQMs, so their valuation of EQMs is a moot point for comparing the scenarios against each other.

In the scenario of actually buying and flying 28 transcon roundtrips, which was one of the scenarios you compared, the member would earn 270,000 EQMs,thus receiving 12 SWUs, 1K status, and probably the top-level Elite Choice reward. These miles would not be earned by purchasing miles directly from UA, and may or may not be earned through the theoretical "phantom booking" option (impossible to determine because there is no such option). Therefore, it's not a moot point.


As for simply purchasing 270K miles from UA, I suspect that preventing this arbitrage is a major reason why there's a 60K per year cap on purchasing miles directly from UA.
And it's probably the same reason why UA doesn't honor phantom bookings for RDM.


Sure, there are probably any number of ways to try to get around that cap -- like making a large number of employees each buy 60K miles and gift it to you, and then allow them to expense the cost . . . .
That won't work, because of the cap on transferred miles.

I don't know.

In the scenario of actually buying and flying 28 transcon roundtrips, which was one of the scenarios you compared, the member would earn 270,000 EQMs,thus receiving 12 SWUs, 1K status, and probably the top-level Elite Choice reward. These miles would not be earned by purchasing miles directly from UA, and may or may not be earned through the theoretical "phantom booking" option (impossible to determine because there is no such option). Therefore, it's not a moot point.

Indeed not a moot point. I plead scrambled brains due to too many time zones changes due to flying too much lately. (Wait, there's no such thing as flying too much, right?)

:)

Indeed not a moot point. I plead scrambled brains due to too many time zones changes due to flying too much lately. (Wait, there's no such thing as flying too much, right?)

:)

I think you are correct, however, in saying that the limit on purchased miles shows that UA is aware of the (potentially) low cost of miles in comparison to the high value of standard C/F awards.

If not for the "arbitrage" problem (great for members, but problem for UA), UA should be happy to sell tons of miles to any member willing to pay the 4-5 cpm in the "direct mileage purchase" option.
If UA isn't eager to sell large amounts of miles at that rate, then it makes sense that they also would not be eager to sell miles for 1-2 cpm by allowing "phantom booking" RDM purchase.