UA Making Significant Changes to MileagePlus: Does AS Benefit at SFO?
 

UA is significantly increasing spending requirements to achieve status in 2020.

https://mileageplusupdates.com/milea...qualification/

There’s been quite a lot of chatter regarding the disappointing route cuts from SFO, but is this an opportunity for AS to at least pick off some customers as UA status becomes more difficult to attain?

It would be particularly intriguing if DL and AA follow UA’s lead in these “enhancements”. Will certainly be an interesting situation to monitor...

I have to think this is AS's last, best chance at SFO to make gains against UA. But they will need actual flights to actual destinations, at times useful to those soon to be demoted 1Ks. That said, "we won't punch you the way that guy over there keeps doing" can be a surprisingly effective sales pitch.

I expect I will be one of the lucky ones to move up the UA ranks based on pure spend, though ...

There are a lot of SFO travelers that will actually benefit from the UA changes simply because they buy high fares and may not be traveling enough miles. So for corporate travelers it may well be easier to qualify. AS has a better chance at attracting the people with the lowest levels of UA status traveling on their own dime IF AS has a flight to wherever the customer needs to go at the time the person needs to travel. These people are likely already flying with AS or another UA competitor though so it is doubtful it will have much impact. B6 already has this system which makes it much easier to qualify for Mosaic status when flying in Mint. So AS actually loses high fare passengers and is most attractive to people flying longer distances at rock bottom prices. Each system has its own benefits. When the economy is great the UA system probably works better. When the economy is in recession, probably not so much given the high spend requirements.

I think the idea that a meaningful number of people purchase their tickets based on the redemption value of the miles they will earn flying is... laughable.
Sure, on FT, everyone maximizes that.
But the family in Redding driving to SFO to fly out to Des Moines to see grandma once every 3 years surely isn't going to pay extra to fly Alaska if their RDMs are 10% more valuable than what they would earn on UA....



Most people couldn't tell a 727 from a 747 and certainly mainly book on lowest ticket price.
So, I agree, if anything, it could drive high value customers TO United, since their hub captive dollars might yield them higher status, faster.

DL has already come to this conclusion. Customers would have to be mathematically challenged if they were taking DL solely because of the amazing value of their sky pesos. DL is no longer going after the customer that wants to fly from SAN-SEA-DEN for $99 to get more miles while AS's program still does encourage that. UA has so many elites at SFO, by the time the 1Ks board on a peak time flights, half the plane could already be on board. Expensive international J/F flight on UA or now with partner flights not ticketed on UA stock count as well, it may well be just as easy or easier to qualify for those high end leisure or business travelers. It will also eliminate low value elites earning status with a credit card waiver.

UA Elites are more interested in Staus than RDM. If the additional spend is a challenge, dropping from 1K to Premier Platinum still affords *G, probably the most sought after benefit. With dynamic award pricing, who really knows how far your RDM will take you anyway?

With a PQD waiver not everyone (even many who reside in the US) will be affected.

James

The $25K PQD waiver goes away with these changes. That will affect LOTS of people

Regards

And the international address waiver / loophole as well, as far as I understand it.

”While we no longer waive the spend requirement for members with international addresses, we have expanded the ability to earn spend credit for these members, which makes qualification consistent for all of our members.”

this, x1000 or more
and because they’re only making that one trip every three years, they tend to forget that they squawked about checked baggage fees and seat selection fees the last time

Correct. I think the "expanded ability to earn spend credit..." is in reference to partner flights now counting for dollars spent. Previously, only flights booked on UA ticket stock (016) gave credit for PQDs. Now tickets booked directly with Star Alliance partners will still count towards spend.

Regards

I actually thought about moving to UA as I will be done with AA (I have waiver as my address was changed to Asia the same day announced the EQD). I think this kills. I have a hard time getting 15k on AA as I refuse to credit my JL CX BA in A class to AA.

(I qualify my AA status based mostly on QR). Since I have JL sapphire anyways, I may just give up status on big 3 and keep JL sapphire and star alliance gold. And be done.

Interesting, not surprising though. I think it is more closing the "loophole" abuse than providing a spend waiver to incentivize foreigners who are not served or marginally served by UA while still requiring a 4 UA flight minimum before granting status. UA did provide service from my hometown briefly but the routes didn't "fly" longterm.

I did enjoy the "spin" though. The irony is how they eloquently outline the current system with the tag "confused?" while the explanation of the new "easier" system is nothing but confusing.

It is very apparent that they want to reduce 1K members.

I have been Premier Silver for years via Marriott but until this year have never flown UA. Doubtful I will going forward.

James

Alaska has long had a strategy of “we suck less than the others” by doing things like keeping a mileage based frequent flyer program and allowing limited seat selection in basic economy. All the while, they have slowly made other devaluations, such as eliminating the low price guarantee, 60 day change waiver, and increasing the cost of redemptions. Even with these kinds of devaluations, they still maintain a frequent flyer program that is demonstrably better for many customers when compared to the competition.

If other airlines follow United in a more consumer-unfriendly direction, it allows Alaska to devalue further (such as increasing status earning requirements) while still being more consumer friendly than the others.

This is my biggest concern regarding how these changes at UA will affect Alaska.

Those who were earning UA Silver or Gold flying Y may see more value out of AS MVP or MVPG, if they can use AS's route network out of SFO and Mileage Plan partner airlines. Clearly, those who were already spending a ton of money with UA benefit from the changes, so AS isn't going to be getting those high value customers.

It seems that those on the UA and DL forums don't think DL will follow UA's lead, due to their recent contract renewal with AMEX and the fact that they've doubled down on earning MQMs via credit card spend.

I actually find this will screw UA in the near term unless they severely reduce the partner RDM earning. I was thinking of using UA in PE to LHR next summer, great EQM and nonstop. But its UA. I see now AC PE and J class are similar jet award at 125 / 200 percent. So i am actually ahead by not flying UA as much. With PQD this year...its all UA flying...next year not much UA flying at all.....they are actually pushing a lot of people to earn on partners versus UA. Of course this can be stopped by drastically reducing the earn of RDM...but they already did that and i dont think they can do very much to reduce earning....but to only award 1 mile for a J class ticket is not very attractive for UA to do.

I think you can say that about most frequenty business travelers, not just UA elites. If you're spending a lot of your time flying around for work, all RDM gets you is another way to pay for sitting in airplanes. I realize there are people like you who really just like to fly around, but I think you're relatively quite a minority (at least insofar as also having the resources to do it) and there are a lot of biz travelers who want the status just to make flying less unpleasant. And UA unless you're 1K you're getting an experience about like the Mileage Plan general member.


For half of my flight patterns this almost makes UA tolerable again. I've had years where I had PQD for plat but was 10K miles short of gold! If most of your tickets are booked inside of 2 weeks, and many inside of 1, you can get a lot of PQDs and not a lot of miles, but also spend a lot of time in middle seats (sometimes in E-) for those PQDs. Earning status faster on AS, and having better benefits (even just the PC upgrade at T-48 is a huge advantage over E+ at check-in) makes AS way more appealing, independent of the RDM. Credit card programs like CSR are going to take people away from the airline based green stamp programs because of the improved flexibility.

I don't disagree, but this makes MVP Gold+ that much more valuable, and partially a reason people sometimes stretch to fly AS, it makes redemptions more flexible for elites on AS and partners.

Most people aren't going to "screw UA" by "screwing themselves" into an extra en-route stop to LHR, or wherever, that UA may fly nonstop. Many FTers aren't "most people," but most UA customers are "most people."

UA has 3X the amount of capacity out of SFO than does AS. Moreover, UA makes its bank from all of the longhaul service it flies into/out of there. AS is going to need a better plan than to hope for elite FFer "leakage".

And based in BC, UA probably doesn't give a flying (or in your case, "not flying,") eff. ;) This thread is about SFO and the AS benefit, if any, which IM(nsh)O, will be little to nil. Probably little to nothing that hasn't already been said here. SFO flyers with money are going to get there as conveniently and comfortably as possible on a per trip basis. Bay Area business travelers flying regionally are going to get there as conveniently and with the most flexibility possible. That is how WN has so much of the west coast business market. More legroom in F and perhaps a more pleasant crew isn't going to get a frequent SFO/ORD flyer, or an SFO/WAS flyer to limit his/her options. It isn't going to get an SFO/DEN flyer to take the very limited SFO/DEN remaining service on AS (yes, that flight via SEA).

Hey, I don't disagree, never did with respect to SFO flyers. For those that can't get there as easily and conveniently, on a per trip basis, as possible, Premier Platinum is still better than flying AS for most flyers. One poster suggested that anything under 1K is equivaent to MVP on AS. I disagree with that too. For business travelers on OPM, I agree that AS won't fulfill their needs but neither did pmVX. No airline can get everyone to everywhere but an alliance is stronger than a partnership. For business travelers on their own money and leisure travelers maybe that is less true. Some posters, including the one that liked your post, are just vehemently anti AS because they took away your little niche player. While VX hade spiffy white recliners and free flowing booze (not to mention the model wasn't profitable) it didn't contribute to a meaningful Status for Business travelers and the product was long in the tooth anyway with B6 Mint entering the Market.

Replace SFO with LAX, EWR, IAH, DEN.... it is all the same. The world doesn't revolve around SFO business flyers.

As far as UA not giving an eff about BC consider that many UA itineraries are cheaper ex YVR than they are ex SEA or ex SFO for that matter. If they really didn't give an eff, they wouldn't try to compensate for the inflated USD. As far as YLW, it was the traveling public that didn't give an eff about UA. They soon found out that there was less O&D traffic between YLW-LAX and later YLW-SFO than were flying on 4× daily AS flights to SEA to connect elsewhere.

James

Ah, but it kinda sorta does. And UA knows this. I'm a UA MM. As long as they don't screw around any more with *G, somewhere on the UG list, more legroom, and the free bags, I'm ok. (That said, post-CO takeover, I've got less than 100K added to my account.) I've been an AS MP member since 1986. I've had status for probably 75% of that time. I'm about to hit 500K AS miles. If I fall off the AS wagon for a year, I'm not even squat.

I'm currently on a trip that will be getting me very close to DL PM for 2020. In the not-so-distant past, I'd be nearing AS 75K for 2020. Instead, I'm scratching for MVPG. This wasn't my Gran Plan. I've probably got 2.5M BIS Paid miles, but since I credited so many to AS partners, I've got squat. UA Gold and nothing else, not even close. I could have had something with DL or AA .. instead, because of the AS MP, I've not got even squat. I guess when you sleep with those that sleep with almost everyone you get what you might expect.

As for the poster that liked my post ... I take no responsibility, nor admiration, but for that particular post, I'm not a hater ;)

And good night, from Buenos Aires, where a massive thunderstorm should be arriving any time now. @:-)

Buenas noches, from Santiago.

I'll spend $20k on UA this year and they're basically firing me as a nine year 1K. They're making a very clear value statement about dollars right now over long term customer relationships that I find frankly offensive.

AS will definitely be getting more business from me ex-SFO and OAK.

I am a former self-funded SFO-based 1K — probably five years, ending when they introduced PQD and I reached MM status. I am shocked that $20k spend is no longer enough for UA to award 1K status. I didn’t go out of my way to hunt for bargain fares and “enjoyed” maybe three MRs in all those years, but I didn’t spend anywhere near that amount. Looking forward to the next recession. :/

Yeah, initially I thought AS might see a slight benefit at SFO from these changes. But now I’m not even sure about that.

The key thing is that these changes are actually a net positive for many short haul UA flyers. But AS ex-SFO has a competitive West Coast network, an uncompetitive transcontinental network, and a nonexistent mid continental network. So for the set of UA frequent flyers that AS can realistically compete for, Mileage Plus has if anything gotten better. I don’t see AS getting any meaningful boost at SFO from this.

You will find a peace of mind just having your UA MM status, and not worrying about requalification every year. The sun will still rise, the sun will still set, the earth will still (if it is not flat) revolve around the sun, and you won't have to worry so much about your miles being subjected to a "we'll find out how much an award costs when we search for an award" lack of chart with the miles you won't be earning.

That said, you must have travel patterns that AS can continue to well-serve ex-SFO and OAK.

I think this will actually be mildly good for AS. The flyers who win with UA from this are high revenue, last minute travelers, with unpredictable destinations and tight schedules. Those people were never going to be loyal to AS anyway at SFO.

If you are a somewhat frequent flyer who has some schedule control and books in advance, AS becomes much more valuable, because chasing status on UA will be too difficult to even bother.

Personally, I was on the bubble between a stretch to UA Gold next year or keeping UA Silver + AS MVP. This makes the decision much easier because there is no way I can hit the new spending requirement without seriously manipulating my corporate travel policies in ways that could jeopardize my job.

Actually, Marriott could be a winner in this. I'll probably plan to earn Titanium again next year for the comped UA Silver. At that point, I don't have to worry about status on UA at all and I can just take AS every time it could possibly work.

I made that choice this year (LAX/BUR based), and chose to go for MVPG, since AS flies to all my biz destinations. If you fly international, UA Gold is worth it, and it may be worth it for the E+ at booking if you generally book far out. I tend to be stuck booking close in so there's only E+ middles at booking time anyway, and I have to check in at T-24 and watch the seating chart for aisles.

I've had to take a few transcons on OAL, but have flown UA zero times this year so far. If I have to fly them, I'll just pay for the E+ (or TOD if available). We have a corporate discount with UA, but OAL, including AS, price out for less often enough that it's not hard to book away from them. People I know who are MM or more, or are maintaining 1K still fly UA, but people flying less than that avoid UA. Out of LA it helps that UA shrank their hub and there's no dominant airline, so pricing is very competitive.

This can't hurt AS out of SFO - that is for sure. My worry is that one of the Big 3 is going to eventually get AS (likely to 'get' SEA/PDX) and that 'who' will be UA to dominate N/S on the West Coast along with WN. I know this has been debated on this forum already, and others will disagree with my assessment....but that is my fear.

Are you offended by them raising the qualification threshold from $15k to $18k (or potentially $24k)? Or are you offended that it’s now (almost) purely based on spend instead of based on a combination of miles flown and spend? I can understand the former...but not sure why the latter would qualify as offensive.

Given the general assumption on Wall Street that airlines should be expanding ASMs, revenues, and profits every year combined with the fact that there are fewer and fewer domestic airlines cornering a larger and larger part of the market, it is only natural for customers to come to the realization that FF programs are less and less about past relationships and more about squeezing just enough value to keep people on the hamster wheel. Everybody wants to feel valued but in reality, you could be giving AS or any other airline $20,000/year even for one particular route and there is no guarantee that that route won't be eliminated out from under you. Most people that spend far less than $20,000 have already come to that conclusion. The same is true of a FF program. It will keep moving up the chain until those spending higher and higher amounts are impacted. You can be sure if UA had 90+% of the market in SFO, they really would not have to give any benefits at all no matter what the spend, as people that want to travel would have to take them regardless. Take the airline that works best for you whether that is AS or any other one and know that all FF programs will be in a constant state of devaluation. Then the relationship between you and the airline is much more equal:)

I'm really happy to see AS bringing SFO-PHX back!
Elite status untethered from miles flown, and a three or four UA ticket a year passenger now favored over a nine year consecutive 1K.

There is an element of "earning" status BIS in the traditional frequent flyer program that UA has completely abandoned.

I think the bigger risk will be to DL, and their expansion at SEA, if when they copy this model.

When is this scheduled for? I only have 2 remaining UA flights this year and one is to PHX. I’d love to start moving that over to AS.

For sure this will help AS because those who don't qualify under UA anymore will be looking at other options. Most everyone beside GS is already shafted on upgrades at SFO. It is too bad AS gutted some of the VX routes from SFO as the old schedule with more frequent flights was a plus.

I'm guessing the UA elites will be as well received as all of the Kalifornia refugees that have bought homes in the Seattle and Portland areas...

If refugees from UA allow AS to strengthen their network at SFO, I would welcome that.

Not until next year, February 13, 2020, to be exact.

Even if you lose upgrades to them? Or if AS gives them status match/challenge offers on very advantageous terms?

Lose upgrades to them on flights that otherwise wouldn’t exist? Sure, I’ll take that.

And I don’t begrudge them a status match, given that AS gave me a status match from 1K to 75K when I moved from UA ;)