$pend based FF program
 

I was asking the Bens about AC moving to a $pend based program as it would likely be better for some of the members that purchase business or latitude fares but don't necessarily hit the 100k mark. If I remember right they said that there was nothing planned at the moment.

In 2015 UA has announced they are moving to a solely spend based program - I thought it was an interesting development.

It's definitely an interesting industry development!

Ben ,Where were you 10 years ago when I started advocating doing just that, a revenue based FF program?:)^
I will hit the Trifecta,Q miles,segments and revenue. :cool:

It's overdue.

The current measurement was originally designed when fare structure was very different from today. Any discount fare required a Saturday night layover. AC was neither flying to Asia (except Singapore for a short while) nor South America. It flew to Europe and the farthest point was probably Moscow. Partner airline flights do not count towards status - "Q" miles were AC flights only.

AC has consistently ignored moderate flyers like me who generally buy discount business class fare. I verily believe that my annual total spent has been more than some SE's especially when I read boasting posts here on how to achieve SE for spending $5,000 or less! One TPAC in business costs more than that!

AC already does this for economy fares by restricting mileage earnings on Tango fares vs. Flex and above.

UA offers its own FFs 100% redeemable mileage earning based on distance no matter what the economy fare class. A nonsensical practice (from a business perspective anyway).

AC could of course follow what UA/DL have done, but already does in a rougher sense by restricting Tango earning. Which is more akin to the European and Asian carrier method.

Keep in mind that this change for UA is ONLY for redeemable miles. So some important key points to keep in mind.

1) Their FF program (equivalent for Altitude) is unchanged. Miles are awarded on distance and NOT spend. With COS bonus for cabins.

2) Miles that can be redeemed are changing (equivalent only to Aeroplan).

Drawing a comparison to the Altitude program and this change is nonsensical for the reasons listed above. Comparisons can only be drawn to the Aeroplan program.

Also, as pointed out above. AC already does this and has for a long long time with the Tango / Flex / Latitude milage accrual differences.

I looked but couldnt find the response. And that is irritating because my recollection is the opposite of yours. I recall something like "it is under consideration and we hope to announce something in the not too distant future." Or I could be dead wrong. But I do remember thinking "be careful what you ask for because you just might get it" after reading Ben's response. Meaning that while I see the sense of this from AC's perspective, I think that except for a vocal few, almost no current elite (inc. SE) would like this in practice. UA's changes seem to have garnered universal condemnation. Even though spend doesnt alter status level, it only impacts their equivalent of AQM (as a multiplier). If I understand what they did correctly.

The way I read it you still qualify exactly the same way for status (miles or segments) but the non-status award miles shift to this revenue based scheme. Or am I mistaken?

I find it hard to imagine how shifting the status level qualification could work without applying it alliance-wide.

Why would you say that? Within *A, qualification for *G varies quite widely.

Until the 2013 benefit year, *G was actually comparatively easy to get on AC (believe it or not) - 35k miles vs 50k on UA for example.

I think LH requires 100k (!!!!) status miles for *G.

Of course different earnings rates for different fare classes between *A programs makes this a difficult direct comparison - but certainly status qualification criteria across the alliance is not uniform.

Ben the spend in just for REDEMABLE miles. AC program giving 25% and 50% miles on low fares is far worse cut than the UA changes.
Qualifying miles from UA have not changed, so don't get to excited this wont allow you to make any more cuts to the Aeroplan program.

As other stated, the changes have nothing to do with their altitude equivalent, which is still mileage based and not downgraded from the current levels.

And the new redeemable miles equivalent, whilst a downgrade, is still more generous than aeroplan.

There is an argument for having some spend associated programme, maybe in conjunction with mileage. But switching solely to a spend based policy as your suggesting would take a huge overhaul, and more importantly likely annoy far more people than it pleases.

And has been said many times before... if you are spending in the region of 25-30k a year and not hitting SE, then you should hire an PA to arrange your travel for you... you're not getting value for money but that isn't the fault of the lower spending SE!

If you are spending that sort of money and not hitting target that tells me 2 things. 1, you don't fly internationally. In which case you don't really need the extra benefits of being SE. And 2, you buy a lot of lattitude fares, which means you can upgrade all segments domestically at anytime for 1 credit meaning you always fly J and never run out of credits. Both things suggest you aren't exactly being screwed by the system.

I think the point was that even for this change, it only applies to 016 ticket stock, because it's hard to track spend when you buy the ticket elsewhere.

And if the program ever changes such that a domestic US flight doesn't get me anything, I'll be very annoyed.

Well at least UA tells you in advance and not retroactive like AC.
Next its always been VERY simple to know how many miles you get on other Star carriers? Just click on this link and you will know how many miles you get to Mileage Plus, NOTHING has changed for Qualifying miles. also for STAR airlines you get the redeemable miles the same way you always did.
https://www.united.com/CMS/en-US/mar...ePartners.aspx

So the only change that will complicate you on Mileage Plus is you need to multiply the $ less tax by 11 if your 1k. Hope this makes it easy. Also your Aeroplan what do you care?

Rather introduce spend-based, just award miles based on the shortest distance between 2 destinations.

They are losing revenue on those adding multiple hops (for the same price) to add extra miles/segments.

100% correct.
Effective 1 March 2015:
Lowest published fare will continue to receive full 100% status miles of distance flown. Only RDM miles will be based on the cost of the ticket with the highest tier getting x11.

For example the lowest publish fare on United from YYZ-SYD-YYZ August 4 2014 (Average for United for last 2 years) for example is C$ 1758.00 AL Inclusive booked in T class.
Say in April 2014 The Lowest Published in T YYZ-SYD-YYZ is C$1758.00.
The Routing is: YYZ-EWR-LAX-SYD-LAX-EWR-YYZ. From March 2015 UA elite will received :
20882 Status miles (including minimum 500 YYZ-Ewr-YYZ)
No change here. Which to me & many 1K I have been in contact with are please there is no change in Status earing miles.

For US based UA MP members loss in RDM can easily be made up by manufactured spending on Chase Credit Card.

Change in status earning would have been major devaluation .

For Canadian Based UA Elite effective 1 March 2015, can continue to receive 100% status miles on lowest publish fare for distance travel..

AC Elites on the other hand will receive between 25%-50% of distance travel.