Originally Posted by
canadiancow
But if they cancel Altitude, no one would have any incentive to fly AC over any other airline.
You mean fares, on-board service, nicer seats, etc., wouldn't be incentives to fly AC? Would you really tolerate a poorer on-board experience, merely to collect a few points and have a few drinks in the lounge?
Right now, if AC is the best option on your primary route, there's an incentive to fly them on other routes where there may be competition because of things like lounge access, upgrades, etc.
Why not let the on-board product within a given class of service be the market differentiator? Instead of the Band-Aid of some shady system of effectively paying a personal kickback to people, primarily business or government travellers, who travel on your airline?
Also, for every upgrade that's given out, there's probably someone who paid good money for J resenting that the guy in the next seat is sitting there 'for free'.
Also, I'm not sure I understand your first statement. "I expect that if people are going to be rewarded for 'loyalty', that it not be done at the expense of revenue passengers."
Are these people not revenue passengers?
Of course they are, but its a question of how much revenue on a given flight. A true 'profit-based' loyalty program probably would resolve this issue, which differentiates between people who merely fly a lot on cheaper fares, and those who buy the big full-J fares. Altitude/Aeroplan perversely rewards the frequent flyer more than the full-J big ticket flyer.
Is a passenger who buys a $1000 ticket every two weeks not more important than a passenger who buys a $1500 ticket once a year?
If that ticket costs the airline $1000 to fulfill per flight, the twice a year $1500 passenger is actually bringing more to the bottom line. AC should be targeting customers in the highest percentiles of spending above average class-of-service adjusted RASM for loyalty programs instead of just targeting revenue, or worse, "miles".