Originally Posted by
YYZFlyboy
Ben Smith, I was interested in some of the back and forth between you and yyzprincess about SE benefits, especially upgrade opportunities.
It was stated by yyzp that she could basically get SE status via UA with 5x trips to Australia for a total of about $10k spend. I've also heard talk in the past on FT about making SE status with even less than $10k in spend.
For these people this then opens up almost unlimited upgrades and top priority for upgrades on their travel. Wouldn't these over-the-top upgrade benefits then discourage some SE's from ever buying premium fares? Wouldn't this then be counter productive to AC from a revenue perspective?
yyzp even used her own travel plans as an example: numerous TPAC flights at the cheapest fares ($2k return) always upgraded to business. How can this be sustainable? (and, again, a good example of how this may discourage some SE's from buying premium fares.)
On the other hand I'm a long-term E50 (average 60-70k travel a year for over 10 years). For business travel I almost always buy up (either Latitude or business) and spend approx. $30k+/- annually. Would I (and the many E50/75's like me) not be more valuable to AC than the large number of (what's affectionately know on FT as) "bottom feeding" SE's?
As I said I buy premium fares for my business travel and had been using the upgrade benefits for international leisure travel. Now that AC has basically removed this benefit (with the addition of co-pay) I have taken a lot of my business elsewhere.
Can you explain the logic of doing this to your mid-tiers?
If the occasional free upgrade for an E50/75 is not sustainable then how can basically unlimited upgrades for ("bottom-feeding") SE's be sustainable?
Has AC seriously looked at true "spend" status instead of just miles travelled?
1. I know there is a strong correlation between spend and mileage. That is why many Airlines use mileage as a surrogate for spend. There are probably outliers in the fit but as the case with outliers, they constitute a negligible percentage of the total population.
2. It is a myth that most SEs buy the cheapest upgradable fares. On the contrary, this group includes some of the most sophisticated travelers. Many buy expensive fares such as B and O to improve their upgrade chances on long haul trips. They actually want to upgrade at booking. They are lots out there who buy J, Z, C....AC knows that the so-called bottom feeder group is too small to base policy.
2. If one spends 30K+ on fares annually, surely it should not be too difficult to squeeze SE out of that budget. There are plenty of suggestions on FT on how that is done.
3. I am one of those who dislike cutbacks on mid-tier benefits. I stand against SEs who believe such cuts advantage them. They don't in the long run. For example, by introducing co-pay at the 50K level, AC added co-pay to its MM program. Now, SEMMers are upset. I hope mid-tiers don't campaign against SE qualification/benefits. Who knows, they may accidently find themselves there.