<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by gleff:
The person who buys full fare tickets but doesn't pick their own travel provider (either because they ignore it, their corporate travel department buys the tickets, or whatever) isn't going to spend more money on an airline because the loyalty program is slanted to high revenue travelers. For them, changes are a wasted benefit -- "an inefficiency in the system."
</font>
I believe the number of such people worldwide is about 10. I've never met or even heard of one. One the other hand, I know many low fare infrequent travellers who choose only by price -- even changing planes to save $5 RT in some cases.
I'm *G on LH, SQ, UA. When I fly LH and SQ, I pay international F. When I fly UA, I pay C fares. Why? Well, to sit in F of course. UA gives away the store. I know with reasonable certainty that I can buy a C ticket on UA and sit in F (or if I wanted to a Y ticket and sit in C). Why on earth would I pay full F on UA? The same is true for all the US majors.
Flying domestically in US, I have dozens of times been unable to buy a First Class ticket on the day of departure because all the seats had been given away to upgraders. That's more lost revenue than the typical FF spends on airline tickets in a lifetime (median average)
The current US FF programs are heavily biased in favor of the mileage runner who makes top status for $1000 to $2000 per year at the expense of passengers who spend about $50,000 or more per year on First Class tickets.
While I can criticise the details of how some of the US majors are implementing the change of focus from those who generate the greatest costs to those who generate the greatest revenue, the general direction is very welcome with this FF.