Originally Posted by
KenHamer
While it might make no sense, it is positively, absolutely "right." Several of FTers were present when the statement was made.
So yeah, now that AC actually "pushes" you to get SE status for much, much less money (i.e. flight passes) you're right - it makes no sense. And yet it's AC's own doing.
You should stick to "speaking for yourself", 'cause your various claims about what all the other frequent fliers, Air Canada status holders, and FTers do, think, value, spend, etc, are miles off the mark. Your Toronto-centric experience is a great deal different than someone who frequently flies YVR-YHZ or YVR-YYT (which is almost as long as YYZ-LHR). So while an upgrade might not be important to you on a take-off-then-land YYZ-YUL trip, to lots of "domestic" fliers, upgrades are very important.
And as (I think) Shareholder recently reminded us, survey after survey after survey repeated shows that upgrades are the most desired and sought after benefit, across all types of fliers and all status levels.
Thank you for a considered post. I appreciate that.
Re the 37K, OK. If you were there, I accept that. That is a strange thing for them to say. But it sounds like that was said a very long time ago, and doesn't sound overly relevant to the current discussion.
Re upgrades, I don't doubt the surveys, but an "upgrade" on YYZ-YUL is not the same thing as a TPAC and TATL upgrade., and the impairment of that benefit has to land differently for different people. Why is saying that out loud wrong? In any case, AC is not designing their program around what people "want", and why should they?
Re who I am speaking for, none of us speaks for anybody but themselves. I think I am speaking about a cohort that is a lot bigger than just myself, but neither you or I have any idea just how many. I think it's a big number, but can't "prove" it, other than to point out that more than half of corporate Canada, plus the two largest government employers, are located in the Rapidair triangle. We are being treated differently because we have some choices, and believe me, I know that if Porter disappeared tomorrow, that automatic SE on the flight pass would be gone the next day!
Re fairness, I hear that. I appreciate your point about fairness and how this may be landing elsewhere. Whether it's right for AC to pursue policies that may land differently in (ie discriminate against ) certain geographies in Canada is something for the regulators to consider (who, I know, have long ago stopped caring). I also very much side with people who think it's immoral that AC makes plan changes without warning. That should be illegal.
Bottom line: I think the position that AC are totally irrational, widely accepted by many here (I don't know if you are one of them, no need to respond on that point), doesn't stand much scrutiny.
The use of the phrase "reward program" is a misnomer. These programs are designed to drive behaviours, not reward them. The behaviour they very clearly want to drive is changing the culture on paid J policies of corporate buyers, and they are willing to take quite a bit of risk with the non-paying but influential end users to try to get that. In fact, part of AC's strategy appears to be to make some of those end users miserable, as a way of putting pressure on their employers.