Originally Posted by
HeadInTheClouds
Honestly, this has to be one of the easiest calculations for UA to make. I think simply by the fact that they made this change, it's easy to conclude that segment qualifiers generate less cash on balance. The total average revenue of those at 100 segments is simply less than the total average revenue of those at 100,000 miles, probably considerably so. If it weren't, this change wouldn't have been considered.
I certainly understand folks being upset if in that range, but arguing the math here seems to be searching for outlying examples to disprove a very simple calculation that's already been made based on actual figures. And of course, there will always be some examples of high revenue segment flyers who are dinged here - unfortunately, no system can possibly be perfect.
I think you're math is off here. Nobody knows what UA's profit margin is for any given flight- all we can consider in order to make a valid comparison is revenue generated.
Let's consider the following hypothetical:
An international flyer who takes 5 trips a year LGA-SIN. That's roughly 100K EQMs. Say the average economy fare is $2000
*. Total revenue collected then would be $10K.
Now consider a domestic segment flyer who takes 50 round trips which equals exactly 100 EQS. His average economy fare is $500
*. Total revenue would be $25K.
Given these two scenarios, the EQS flyer generates $15K
MORE revenue but under the new rules is now considered "less elite" than the EQM flyer.
I simply don't agree that these are "outlier" examples either. My 2010 spend for 104 segments is just north of $20K and now I'm being asked to fly 20% more next year to achieve the same status. That's just not fair IMHO.
*these numbers are approximate but in my experience constitutes a fairly accurate representation of fare prices.