Yul_voyager

First, it's not 50k for "everyone else", there is some program with *G at 20k, 25k or 40k...
Otherwise there won't be less people in MLL because 35k will always gives access to MLL !

Lllahim

Just seems like make work project for AC staff. They took away a little from 35K, gave little that is really new to 50K (actually reduced possible eUpgrade from the current 45 for E to 40; threw in 5 eUpgrades for 75K. Pity the flight attendant running down the J cabin taking meal order for 5 TT classes. AC could have achieved its stated objectives by moving qualification for P to 30K and E to 50K and enhancing each a little.

tyberius

It's disappointing, again, to see the program devalued. Several times in one year is a lot to take.

On the other hand, the breakdown into more tiers and at the levels they are at, makes a lot more sense to me. Given the number of people in the lounges, and the difficulty that Es are having getting upgrades, it also would seem to make logical sense to do what has been done.

What I like the most about it, and makes it much, much more tolerable to me, is the long advance notice we're given. It means that we are not buying blindly into a product and finding out afterwards what we got. People can now plan accordingly and those who don't find value in the new system can easily move their business elsewhere.

So for that I really applaud the move. That and the multi-tier approach, just sad to see benefits reduced yet again.

rehoult

This seems like a reasonable change to delineate the various levels of spenders. However, if rewarding spending is the goal, there needs to be a change to give a Latitude COS bonus as otherwise the talk about aligning benefits with spending is just talk as frequent Latitude buyers are probably the most profitable segment of customers AC has.

painintheuk

My recent looks at seating make me worry about this too. This has been a big benefit for me.

Dr. PITUK

tyberius

Dan Orlovsky is almost identical to Aaron Rogers except that he doesn't throw the ball as well or make as good decisions. If you can get past that, they're basically the same quarterback. Similarly the Colts are just about as good as the Packers if you take those extra 13 losses out of the equation and spot them as many wins.

So yeah, *S status is just about the same as *G status once you subtract the differences.

highlander88

Very elitist attitude displayed by those who fly more.

I just qualified at around 40k, and I have about 30-35k flying next year, much of it in Canada. Sadly for Air Canada, now that there is no way I will make the Elite equivalent, they just forefited hundreds (thousands) of dollars in revenue.

(Let's see, $130 Tango+ Premium x 7 round trips = $910)

Doesn't seeem like the best move to tick off their moderately best customers to satisfy their very best customers, who were going to stay regardless.

CloudsBelow

AC has enjoyed one of (of not the) highest RASM of all airlines in North America. Will be interesting to see if more and more of these <50K elites begin choosing T instead of T+ thus eating into some of those healthy rev numbers . . . Though, the extra $$ from LMU might make up for some of that revenue leakage.

tyberius

I am SE, and demoted myself to E through flying this year because I saw the program getting devalued. Next year will be my last as an E because I won't make 50,000 miles (I did 60,000 this year). So the program has brought me down to no-status and I'm already planning my parachute, thankfully the Centurion card is a great parachute.

That said, your argument is not very strong if you are saying that $910 of revenue loss is something they should consider in terms of offering you a better elite package. It probably doesn't cover the cost of the elite package.

Like it or not, they probably crunched the numbers and just decided that it's worth it. Leaving that $910 on the table for you and deleting your international upgrades (two of which from T+) compared to a revenue ticket or even an LMU on the same seat is a good tradeoff for them.

So I am with you in terms of disappointment and my flight plan is made based on my disappointment (all my flights for the next year are already booked), but people like you with their $910 of revenue is probably the *reason* that they are doing this rather than a stunning oversight that will cause them pain.

Ideally they don't want you on the FF program at all. They want you buying those T flights that you are now going to buy. They will go ahead and price compete vs. Westjet and Porter on the bottom dollar seats and give you no reward benefits for being a price shopper. That is, they are going to do a head to head product+cost matchup with the competition and think they can win your business regardless of status benefits. They think you will fly with whomever gives you the lowest price without the product sucking hard and they are ready to pitch to you based on that. They are probably right. They will lose some of your flights to Westjet or Porter but they will retain a lot too based on schedule, product and price.

Again, sucks to be us, but it is really hard to argue with the cold logic. Time will tell whether this bites them in the butt to convert a bunch of Es staying in for status into price shoppers, but they seem to be trusting their projections and if $910 in revenue represents the average E, then I would have to side with them.

highlander88

The other thing that is so unfair AIR CANADA TOP TIER

Is that within Canada, lowest fares earn no status miles.

When you compare that to UA, US or CO, the American competitors who you compare your program so much to and exclaim how much greater you are than, you need to keep in mind that it is much harder to earn Status Miles in Canada than in America.

It's therefore a falicious comparison, like apples to pears. Similar, but totally different.

Z-man

So what program are you going to join? Air Miles and fly Werstjet across Canada? Are you going to connect through EWR and fly CO or Atlanta and MSP and fly Delta? You're flying much of it in Canada so it only makes sense that you will be on AC for a lot of those 35k miles..(if you're going to Werstjet then I think you have not thought this through). If you join another *A program but fly a lot on AC, you won't even get to use the privileges that you would get on AE....

CloudsBelow

Fully agree.
Whatever happened to keep it simple stupid . . .
It's ridiculous to have more than 4 tiers plus the mindset of most 35Ks will be "sure, I'm elite, but I'm now competing with two higher levels" (even though the overall numbers have not changed). Perception

highlander88

Another thing I would point out, is this board is skewed to extreme frequent flyers, who provide a lot of business, but again their numbers as I'm sure you know are smaller than the mid level group of people.

It amazes me how you take away international eupgrades, when there really isn't a significant cost associated with that- those seats will be empty anyways.

But as I said, I think the silent majority will be quite unhappy with this and will end up spending less money on the airline as a result. I'm just glad I didn't book my YVR-YYZ in Feb yet, I'll save myself 130 bucks, plus more if there's a fare sale.

m.y

I agree! especially when AC controls R space tightly and sells LMU ahead of upgrades. The marginal cost of upgrading would be cost of extra food and beverage loaded, and perhaps some maintenance and cleaning cost for the seats.

Santander

Please everyone stop comparing Canada with the US... different countries, different airline industries, different market size/competition. You don't want AC to take cues from UA/CO or US... you'll end up with plastic cups in "F", overcrowded lounges with terrible "snacks", dirty old planes and having to pay for domestic lounge access (can you imagine not getting lounge access when you pay for an F ticket?). Think of all the people who regularly commute to YMM... making Tango 100% accrual will open the floodgates for those people to take away your NA upgrades and make the YYC MLL even more crowded than it already is.

We all want AC to make their programme the best it can be, but Canada isn't the US and AC's programme needs to be different from those of their American counterparts.