Feb 15, 2018, 4:03 pm
Last edit by: ashill
Alaska has disallowed new bookings or changes to bookings to intra-Asia award tickets less than 72 hours before departure on Cathay Pacific (CX), Japan Airlines (JL), and Hainan Airlines (HU) due to fraudulent bookings.
Initially (late January 2018 for HU; February 13, 2018 or so for CX and JL), this prohibition applied to all award bookings on these partners. On February 14, 2018, Alaska changed the rule to apply only to intra-Asia awards.
https://blog.wandr.me/2018/02/alaska...t-mileageplan/
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...artner-awards/
Initially (late January 2018 for HU; February 13, 2018 or so for CX and JL), this prohibition applied to all award bookings on these partners. On February 14, 2018, Alaska changed the rule to apply only to intra-Asia awards.
https://blog.wandr.me/2018/02/alaska...t-mileageplan/
http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.c...artner-awards/
AS Limiting Award Bookings T-3 Days of Departure [Intra Asia Only] (CX, JL, HU)
Feb 14, 2018, 11:47 am
#61
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Kan@da
Programs: Anything with sweet spots
Posts: 1,790
If those who are threatening to leave AS MP over this actually follow through, then I love this change. Weed out those who are just using the plan to buy or transfer in miles just to book CX F. Sure, it will affect some actual AS flyers as well, but for the most part, if it gets rid of those who just see it as a cheap currency to buy a premium award and have never sat their butts on an AS plane, bring it on.
Frequent flier programs generate profits for airlines and frustration for travelers
Feb 14, 2018, 11:55 am
#62
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,621
Hi -
This definitely affects me. I am a G75 that takes 1-2 RTs a year to SE Asia. My dates and times are flexible, and I have learned that I can usually find a seat in J (once in a while F) by waiting for TPAC carriers to release some last-minute availability when they decide their loads are light enough to allow it. This has totally taken that away.
The sad thing is that everybody wins. the airlines gets some revenue for a seat that they would not sell and I get a J seat as long as I was flexible about the day and time. That seems to be gone now.
And yes, it is changing the value proposition again. I will have to look at 1K/EXP/Diamond again -- something I have not done in many years.
This definitely affects me. I am a G75 that takes 1-2 RTs a year to SE Asia. My dates and times are flexible, and I have learned that I can usually find a seat in J (once in a while F) by waiting for TPAC carriers to release some last-minute availability when they decide their loads are light enough to allow it. This has totally taken that away.
The sad thing is that everybody wins. the airlines gets some revenue for a seat that they would not sell and I get a J seat as long as I was flexible about the day and time. That seems to be gone now.
And yes, it is changing the value proposition again. I will have to look at 1K/EXP/Diamond again -- something I have not done in many years.
Last edited by Orwaid; Feb 14, 2018 at 12:36 pm
Feb 14, 2018, 12:00 pm
#63
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: MCI
Programs: AA Gold 1MM, AS MVP, UA Silver, WN A-List, Marriott LT Titanium, HH Diamond
Posts: 52,574
Hi -
This definitely affects me. I fly 1-2 RTs a year to SE Asia. My dates and times are flexible, and I have learned that I can usually find a seat in J (once in a while F) by waiting for TPAC carriers to release some last-minute availability when the decide their loads are light enough to allow it. This has totally taken that away.
This definitely affects me. I fly 1-2 RTs a year to SE Asia. My dates and times are flexible, and I have learned that I can usually find a seat in J (once in a while F) by waiting for TPAC carriers to release some last-minute availability when the decide their loads are light enough to allow it. This has totally taken that away.
Feb 14, 2018, 12:06 pm
#65
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: B6 Mosaic, Bonvoy LT Titanium (x SPG LT), IHG Spire, UA Silver
Posts: 5,848
I may be making a very incorrect assumption here, but most of the posters that are the most upset about this are located in areas that are not even AS markets, or even in North America. If one isn’t even flying AS and merely using them as a means to buy/transfer/credit miles solely to use on premium cabin redemptions, how are they valuable customers to AS? I, for one, wish there was some way to stop his kind of thing.
And before you jump down my throat saying you are using the program within the rules, I get it. I just wish AS didn’t make it so easy for someone on the other side of the world who has never flown, and has no intention to ever fly AS, to open an account, buy or transfer in a bunch of miles and book CX F. Either for themselves or to sell. JMHO.
And before you jump down my throat saying you are using the program within the rules, I get it. I just wish AS didn’t make it so easy for someone on the other side of the world who has never flown, and has no intention to ever fly AS, to open an account, buy or transfer in a bunch of miles and book CX F. Either for themselves or to sell. JMHO.
Feb 14, 2018, 12:10 pm
#66
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Pacific Wonderland
Programs: ʙᴏɴᴠo̱ʏ Au, IHG Au, HH Dia, Nexus, Pilot FlyingJ Preferred
Posts: 5,336
Can also add to the award gripes losing JL PY because of some unknown ticketing problem.
I wonder if the close in ticketing issue is really one too many AS agents mucked up changes and AS ended up buying cash tickets to reinstate the itinerary?
Feb 14, 2018, 12:14 pm
#67
Join Date: Aug 2013
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold
Posts: 917
Feb 14, 2018, 12:34 pm
#68
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 6,484
Are they thinking of inintended loyalty consequences of this change? Or are they weighing that they're willing to accept the fallout?
Feb 14, 2018, 12:42 pm
#69
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: BLI
Programs: Alaska MVPG
Posts: 206
I hope everyone angry about this change takes a few minutes to contact Alaska to express their thoughts.
I have a trip planned in a couple months and was really hoping to burn some miles on a last minute CX F or J fare, now those plans are hosed.
I have a trip planned in a couple months and was really hoping to burn some miles on a last minute CX F or J fare, now those plans are hosed.
Feb 14, 2018, 1:47 pm
#70
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PDX USA
Programs: AS MVPG, AA, BA, SPG Gold, HHonors Gold, Hyatt Platinum, IHG, Hertz 5*
Posts: 690
Sorry if someone already stated this, as I've skimmed through most of the posts and didn't see it mentioned.
There IS a way to add a pin to one's MP account. So, while 'fraud' may be the AS talking point culprit, what AS is really failing to do is alert their MP members to this security feature - including significantly loyal elites that actually fly the airline every year - and exempt elites from this so they continue to add value to truly loyal customers. Instead, it's the nuclear option. Somebody at Angle Lake isn't being thoughtful here. I've had a pin on my MP account for several years. I also do not subscribe or use third-party rewards program trackers like Award Wallet (you know, the place that has all your account numbers and passwords to them).
If this a false-front to a more simplistic reason that either CX/JL/HU are driving this due to too many AS Awards on their flights, then shame on AS for lack of transparency, but for all of us living in the miles-and-points universe: who really thinks this model is sustainable when bloggers and social media spread the 'good news' about cheap miles here, easy redemptions there, luxury-for-pennies there? Is it that we've exacerbated this problem, partly?
Still, I remain one that believes there are better options for AS here to retain customer loyalty - and MP as a loyalty program - by placing limitations on non-elites, and requiring PINS prior to mileage redemptions for everyone. One of which they can offer today, and the other with simple training of agents and coding in the system.
There IS a way to add a pin to one's MP account. So, while 'fraud' may be the AS talking point culprit, what AS is really failing to do is alert their MP members to this security feature - including significantly loyal elites that actually fly the airline every year - and exempt elites from this so they continue to add value to truly loyal customers. Instead, it's the nuclear option. Somebody at Angle Lake isn't being thoughtful here. I've had a pin on my MP account for several years. I also do not subscribe or use third-party rewards program trackers like Award Wallet (you know, the place that has all your account numbers and passwords to them).
If this a false-front to a more simplistic reason that either CX/JL/HU are driving this due to too many AS Awards on their flights, then shame on AS for lack of transparency, but for all of us living in the miles-and-points universe: who really thinks this model is sustainable when bloggers and social media spread the 'good news' about cheap miles here, easy redemptions there, luxury-for-pennies there? Is it that we've exacerbated this problem, partly?
Still, I remain one that believes there are better options for AS here to retain customer loyalty - and MP as a loyalty program - by placing limitations on non-elites, and requiring PINS prior to mileage redemptions for everyone. One of which they can offer today, and the other with simple training of agents and coding in the system.
Feb 14, 2018, 2:00 pm
#71
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NYC
Programs: AA 2MM, Bonvoy LTT, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,638
If this a false-front to a more simplistic reason that either CX/JL/HU are driving this due to too many AS Awards on their flights, then shame on AS for lack of transparency, but for all of us living in the miles-and-points universe: who really thinks this model is sustainable when bloggers and social media spread the 'good news' about cheap miles here, easy redemptions there, luxury-for-pennies there? Is it that we've exacerbated this problem, partly?
Feb 14, 2018, 2:07 pm
#72
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PDX USA
Programs: AS MVPG, AA, BA, SPG Gold, HHonors Gold, Hyatt Platinum, IHG, Hertz 5*
Posts: 690
Feb 14, 2018, 2:31 pm
#73
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northern Calif./Eastern Ida.
Programs: Amethyst Premier Plutonium Medallion
Posts: 20,642
i will be contacting AS with a very simple question. if AS is trying to address a fraud problem, why is that problem exclusively affecting this subset of partners and not all bookings?
the answer: because it's not a fraud issue.
Just sent this to AS via [email protected]. Encourage others to do the same.
the answer: because it's not a fraud issue.
Just sent this to AS via [email protected]. Encourage others to do the same.
To whom it may concern-
I am very disappointed in AS recent decision to limit bookings of partner award tickets on Cathay, JAL, and Hainan within 72 hours of departure. This is a further devaluation to a program that has already experienced several recent setbacks including loss of global partners and changes in miles required for most international redemptions.
My questions are very simple:
1) If this change is *truly* being implemented to reduce fraudulent award ticket bookings, why are only these partners affected and not the entire suite of AS partners and AS flights? If someone is truly looking to fraudulently use another members miles, certainly they will happily book tickets on another partner instead. For instance, American Airlines serves several of the same destinations as JAL and Cathay...why not block those bookings inside T-72 too?
2) If this change is *truly* being implemented to reduce fraudulent award ticket bookings, AS is basically admitting by this action that their current account security measures are insufficient to guarantee integrity of its members miles and frequent flyer accounts. Why not invest in fixing that issue versus penalizing members by limiting access to a very specific collection of awards?
You may sense that I am exceptionally cynical of the explanation of fraud protection. What this really feels like to this member is that AS is not willing to pay for premium cabin awards on JAL, Hainan, and Cathay...since it is well known that coveted premium cabin space comes available most reliably on short notice before departure. I can understand how this space costs AS a lot of money, but limiting it for members like myself who have earned our miles within the spirit of the mileage plan program, through legitimate flying on both AS and partners, credit card sign up bonuses and spending, and other promotional activities is exceptionally disappointing.
I hope that leadership takes a careful look at the policy, and especially their explanation of it. Your mileage plan members are not stupid, and we can all see exactly what is going on here. We would react a lot more amicably to this policy if it was accompanied by honesty about the reason it was implemented, instead of feeling like the real reason is hidden behind a smoke screen with an explanation that simply doesn't add up.
I am very disappointed in AS recent decision to limit bookings of partner award tickets on Cathay, JAL, and Hainan within 72 hours of departure. This is a further devaluation to a program that has already experienced several recent setbacks including loss of global partners and changes in miles required for most international redemptions.
My questions are very simple:
1) If this change is *truly* being implemented to reduce fraudulent award ticket bookings, why are only these partners affected and not the entire suite of AS partners and AS flights? If someone is truly looking to fraudulently use another members miles, certainly they will happily book tickets on another partner instead. For instance, American Airlines serves several of the same destinations as JAL and Cathay...why not block those bookings inside T-72 too?
2) If this change is *truly* being implemented to reduce fraudulent award ticket bookings, AS is basically admitting by this action that their current account security measures are insufficient to guarantee integrity of its members miles and frequent flyer accounts. Why not invest in fixing that issue versus penalizing members by limiting access to a very specific collection of awards?
You may sense that I am exceptionally cynical of the explanation of fraud protection. What this really feels like to this member is that AS is not willing to pay for premium cabin awards on JAL, Hainan, and Cathay...since it is well known that coveted premium cabin space comes available most reliably on short notice before departure. I can understand how this space costs AS a lot of money, but limiting it for members like myself who have earned our miles within the spirit of the mileage plan program, through legitimate flying on both AS and partners, credit card sign up bonuses and spending, and other promotional activities is exceptionally disappointing.
I hope that leadership takes a careful look at the policy, and especially their explanation of it. Your mileage plan members are not stupid, and we can all see exactly what is going on here. We would react a lot more amicably to this policy if it was accompanied by honesty about the reason it was implemented, instead of feeling like the real reason is hidden behind a smoke screen with an explanation that simply doesn't add up.
Last edited by PV_Premier; Feb 14, 2018 at 2:45 pm
Feb 14, 2018, 2:54 pm
#75
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NYC
Programs: AA 2MM, Bonvoy LTT, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 14,638
i will be contacting AS with a very simple question. if AS is trying to address a fraud problem, why is that problem exclusively affecting this subset of partners and not all bookings?
the answer: because it's not a fraud issue.
Just sent this to AS via [email protected]. Encourage others to do the same.
the answer: because it's not a fraud issue.
Just sent this to AS via [email protected]. Encourage others to do the same.
For CX, passenger would have taken the flight before the rightful MP owner (or AS in case of bartering miles) realize fraud was going on.