Singleflyer

I don't get the difference either. For 7 years as CP I have been upgraded about 98% of the time. Full Y fare purchased day of departure.

Now that the west has taken over that % has dropped slightly on the east and is about 25% on the west.

From this post it sounds like the west likes to clear people early, and they totaly forget about the full fare paying customer on the day of departure.

I find it hard to beleive that everyone up front last week on the DEN-PHX flight paid more than the Y fare, and was a full CP with over 110,000 miles, I made CP on overpriced segments.

If this average stays after the system intergration, I am gone SOOOOO fast.

jerseyfinn

I'm glad that folks are increasingly aware of how discordant the UG process has gotten. US, for its part, hasn't exactly been clear and forthcoming in explaining what it is up to. We ourselves always ask what the policy is and we always receive all sorts of different answers. Most recently we're told at LGW that it's tier and check-in time.

Robertsonsland comment that they will adopt the west model of tier plus activity kind of makes sense to me if one takes into account the ( hopefully small, but still very real ) impact of FTD elites. One would hope that the airline values flying elites over flower elites. Mind you, I've nothing against those who acquire status via flower power, but one who flies their miles should indeed get the UG over one who does not if the airline truly values its flying customer. I guess that there is no perfect UG queuing solution, but there does need to be a consistent policy.

My wife and I fly about 1/3 of our activity on the domestic side and we've enjoyed good UG success there. The TA side where we do the bulk of our travel is growing increasingly gnarly in terms of UGs. Reconfigured cabins intensify competition. But the real problem is trying to divine an UG strategy given the amorphous US policy.

US has ceased winter TA discounts on M/H/Q and B fares ( a TA winter B fare now costs @ 150% more than it did a year ago -- $1780 vs. $750 last January ). Likewise the M/H/Qs stack up between $1100 to $1500 now. GoEnvoy ( which is unlikely to be embraced by many ) is a curve ball which might induce some folks to purchase that $400 T fare and ante up the $500 for a OW UG. All fine and dandy, but what if you're an elite holding an M/H/Q queuing for an UG?

I'm not averse to GoEnvoy, but I'm simply trying to figure out how many seats US will allocate to the product & how the overall UG process functions so I can determine how far upstream to swim when we purchase tickets and want a decent shot at UGs.

I can accept that one does not always get the UG. But it stinks when US is inconsistent with how the UG policy functions or unclear about what it intends to do. As we're approaching the final consolidation of SABRE and other operational aspects, I would hope that US clarifies just what DM UGs are all about and implements a unitary policy.

Barry

kudzu

Over the MLK weekend, I was resigned to sitting in the back LAS-DCA on HP when no upgrade came through at the window, and it showed F0. Imagine my surprise when I got email notification that I had been upgraded 2 days out! As far as I know, availability never left F0 on the days I checked.

Don't know what to make of this. Luck, perhaps. It may also indicate HP does try to run the upgrade list even after the window to catch those not so lucky on the initial or subsequent runs, and of course no other Preferred had called at the right time to snatch the upgrade away...

kudzu

Some Q fares are now loaded in the system. I looked quickly (didn't look at availability or fare rules) for random Mar 9 - 12 and they are actually quite reasonable for upgradeable fares, esp with DMUs, e.g.
CLT - LGW 760 + roundtrip
CLT - FRA 761 + RT
PHL - MAD 795 +

I agree with you - US needs a clear, unequivocal policy on upgrades going forward post systems merger. Until then, those of us who keep up with this muddy upgrade process clearly have the edge competing for upgrades

indogulf

deleted