Originally Posted by
Xyzzy
I absolutely agree with most of this, but please don't let the assumption that more miles == better customer throw you off course. The most frequent customer is quite often NOT the best customer. That discussion, is best left for another thread.
The huge problem I have with the absurd new 'flexible' EQM policy is that they are n
w going to be anything
but flexible. They are now NFEQM --
Non
Flexible
EQM. Chase has spent a few years touting these as a way to, "turn silver into gold." Sure -- people understand that. But, they're going to have a hell of a hard time understanding how it doesn't turn Platinum into 1k. People right here on FlyerTalk have had a hard time understanding the new rules, and we know more than pretty much anyone about how these programs work. Add to that the fact that pre-2012 NFEQM don't expire and NFEQM earned in 2012 and beyond have an expiration date.
Indeed. I did equate most frequent with most "valuable"..... that may not
be reality
And you're right, many of the "normal" frequent flyers are not going to
be able to "understand" this new math, no matter how hard they try to
spin it. For many, it will seem like a clear "bait and switch."
(of course, the airline's response next year will be that there IS no more OnePass Program, so anyone should be "grateful" that their "old" FlexEQMs didn't magically expire 12/31/11... And for the legal purists, the answer, will, of course be "all terms of our program are subject to change or discontinuance at will.").
take home message.... the "value" of frequent flyer benefits are being eroded, just as quickly as peanuts, free food and pillows have disappeared
from the aircraft.
Originally Posted by
CollegeFlyer
OK, but that's why Customer A is only Plat and Customer C is 1K. If oyu think Customer A is clearly <<<< than the value of Customer C, then how is giving Customer C 1K and giving Customer A Plat not to "protecting the sanctity of 1K status"?
And the same reasoning applies to give Customer B Plat status and Customer C 1K status, at least as far as the "protecting the sanctity of 1K" or whatever goes.
I am just saying that it does seem to effectively restrict 1K to higher-value customers, and that your example illustrates that rather than disproving it.
There is no argument that Customer C "earned" 1K status by his flying alone.
That isn't the point.
The issue is the sudden (and retroactive) devaluation of FlexEQMs that have
already been earned under an existing policy that made them of value to elites at ALL levels of flying....
Someone who routinely flies 30 or 40K miles a year gets an
incredible value when s/he redeems existing Flex miles to achieve platinum status...
For someone who already FLIES >75K/year, however, the value of their accumulated FlexEQMs is now essentially ZERO.
And the group of elites that gets penalized the most? Well, that's the folks who "just missed out" on 1K by a few thousand miles... Banked 20,000 Flex miles for that "rainy day?" sorry. can't redeem ANY Flex miles..... you're still a platinum...
There is NO scenario under which the new rule is equitable for CO-centric elites who already fly >75K, but can't
use any of their accumulated FlexEQMs to "top off" to 1K, or to obtain another round of SWU/CR1s, etc....
None.
And since a re-branded version of this card is CERTAIN to be forthcoming next year, UA-centric elites should also be "concerned" about this change, because it will almost certainly apply to that card as soon as it's introduced.