Originally Posted by
jrweaver912
I tweeted them and they sent back "@jrweaver912 The minimum you would earn is 500 miles. -Michael" which seams to point to 500 miles as the absolute minimum.
This is actually kinda good news as when I used to fly to chicago I would always route mci-atl-ord for the most miles (1,298 flown miles) but now that would only earn 649 miles , but if I route it mci-msp-ord as both flights are sub 500 miles I would earn 1000 miles from the minimums and spend less time with my ... in the seat.
This makes it slightly more palatable. For example, I'm on DL SLC-SEA in X class right now (booked before this change was announced) and I'll get 500 instead of 689. I'd rather have the 689 obviously, but slightly better. The loss of EQMs is killer on long-haul flights though so I'm sure I'll find myself mostly on AA....or maybe I bite the bullet and pay more for AS transcon (and switch to EWR vs. JFK...not sure how I feel about that as I've never flown into EWR...I got to used to the AirTrain). The good news is that I'm in consulting now and since everyone travels all the time, the principals actually understand the value of retaining FF status and benefits even if on the practice's dime. Under old company Egencia travel policies, hard to trick it into AS transcon.
I'm likely to start traveling internationally this year, so will be interesting to see how that plays out. The bosses are both on UA (1K and Global Services) but I am just not going there. Will AA be workable ex-SEA to Europe and Japan? I may just be able to fly paid business in which case it is a moot point.