Of all the ridiculous things that have happened as a result of the merger, this one issue single-handedly takes the cake for me....

Customer A flies 10,000 BIS miles, deposits 65K FlexEQMs, and gets next-to-top-tier status (i.e., Platinum).

Customer B flies 99,000 BIS miles, but can't use 1,000 FlexEQMs to reach the next higher tier (i.e., 1K).

Customer C flies 147,000 BIS miles, but can't redeem 3,000 FlexEQMs to qualify for another set of upgrade e-certs.

Yeah, that makes sense, encourage your best customers to fly less, and simultaneously devalue the FlexEQMs already earned by them to essentially $0.

I am utterly STUNNED that anyone in management (and certainly no one from the ex-CO team) would think this is *remotely* the correct (much less equitable) answer.

And forget the notion that this rule somehow "protects the sanctity of 1K status." That's utterly absurd, because the monetary "value" of Customer A to the airline is <<< than the "value" of Customer B, and clearly <<<< than the "value" of Customer C.

Brilliant move, Wacker Drive!!