Any reason to book non-X fares for CA flight?
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: EWR/PHL/JFK
Programs: A3*G, AS MVPG, UA, AA
Posts: 610
Any reason to book non-X fares for CA flight?
Going on a necessary trip and taking AS SFO-LAX. Booked main instead of saver thinking that on such a short flight in the middle of the day, upgrade availability would be decent.
But then realized that SFO-LAX is < 350 miles so there’s going to be zero service. So is there really any point in paying for the “upgrade” here? Plane as currently scheduled is E175.
But then realized that SFO-LAX is < 350 miles so there’s going to be zero service. So is there really any point in paying for the “upgrade” here? Plane as currently scheduled is E175.
#2
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seattle
Programs: Costco Club
Posts: 1,155
Yeah, I've been asking that to myself as well. I recently did a couple trips on AS SEA-SFO and saver fare was cheap. I didn't get an offer to upgrade, my traveling companion had a main fare (took advantage of the BOGO) and got offered and took a $49 upgrade at check in on one of the segments. He flew main cabin with me on the other segment and said the only difference was a wine and a bigger seat. With about 40 people on each of our flights the boarding/disembarking was quick anyway so it all depends on the value you get out of it I suppose.
#3
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
I've never looked at what AS passed off as "service" as meaning much. Heavy or light load, the wider seats with better pitch make for a less unpleasant experience. Whether that's worth it to you as an individual is a subjective call. If it's what you spend on an appetizer at a restaurant, go for it. If it's the difference between making your mortgage, I'd pass.
#5
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: AS 75K (OW), SK Silver (*A), UR, MR
Posts: 3,341
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: SEA (the REAL Washington); occasionally in the other Washington (DCA area)
Programs: DL PM 1.57MM; AS MVPG 100K
Posts: 21,368
heads would explode throughout the AS IT department ... it's hard-pressed enough to establish and maintain basic functionality in the full website, the mobile version, and the app ... to say nothing of spending time on superficial UI stuff like redesigning the "My Trips" (or "Trips") front page
#7
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: British Columbia
Programs: AS MVPG100K, Marriott Marriott Titanium Elite, Hilton Gold
Posts: 7,263
James
#8
Join Date: Apr 2018
Programs: Mileage Plan
Posts: 233
Even before the current situation, I would occasionally just do X fares on SNA-SFO flights as it was just short enough and I'd get an okay seat anyway. As MVP Gold/75K, the Experience on the E175 was basically Premium Class anyway and usually I didn't need to change plans on those Disney getaways to it didn't matter.
Now that basically everything is flexible, there's no reason not to get an X fare on CA flights unless you're on an E175 and you really need an onboard power outlet.
Now that basically everything is flexible, there's no reason not to get an X fare on CA flights unless you're on an E175 and you really need an onboard power outlet.
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: PDX
Programs: AS 75K, BW Plat, Marriott Gold, IHG Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 10,724
Even before the current situation, I would occasionally just do X fares on SNA-SFO flights as it was just short enough and I'd get an okay seat anyway. As MVP Gold/75K, the Experience on the E175 was basically Premium Class anyway and usually I didn't need to change plans on those Disney getaways to it didn't matter.
Now that basically everything is flexible, there's no reason not to get an X fare on CA flights unless you're on an E175 and you really need an onboard power outlet.
Now that basically everything is flexible, there's no reason not to get an X fare on CA flights unless you're on an E175 and you really need an onboard power outlet.
#10
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,626
I'm fairly sure many folks assume that the E175s have power in all cabins like AS mainline so the power outlets in F could be a deal breaker between sitting in Y vs. F, especially on longer flights like mid-cons. I echo many others in saying that the E175 is a great airplane with two major flaws: 1) There is WAY too much space between the windows 2) No power outlets in Y
Meanwhile, I paid the I fare on a recently booked SEA/OAK - X $69. Cheapest Y -$89. I - $129
GGU cheapest $144, 75K eligible for instant U $227. MVPG eligible for instant U $260. And there's no U space.
1761 EQMs, no?
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: PDX
Programs: AS 75K, BW Plat, Marriott Gold, IHG Plat, Hilton Gold
Posts: 10,724
#13
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: EWR/PHL/JFK
Programs: A3*G, AS MVPG, UA, AA
Posts: 610
50% EQM bonus is there no matter the class of service. The options here are 54/69/99, so the cpm is actually better for the X fare in this case. My desire for service has less to do with something particularly “nice” and more of a practical matter that I don’t need to be at the airport early just to take care of those things. It’s the convenience of having it at my seat without having to deal with airport lines etc.
I’m only at 10k miles so far this year and most likely won’t be doing any more flying, so an extra 375 miles isn’t really going to make the difference here (plus it’s below the 500 mile threshold that AS would normally be willing to grace anyway).
Sounds like X it is.
I’m only at 10k miles so far this year and most likely won’t be doing any more flying, so an extra 375 miles isn’t really going to make the difference here (plus it’s below the 500 mile threshold that AS would normally be willing to grace anyway).
Sounds like X it is.
#14
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: British Columbia
Programs: AS MVPG100K, Marriott Marriott Titanium Elite, Hilton Gold
Posts: 7,263
50% EQM bonus is there no matter the class of service. The options here are 54/69/99, so the cpm is actually better for the X fare in this case. My desire for service has less to do with something particularly “nice” and more of a practical matter that I don’t need to be at the airport early just to take care of those things. It’s the convenience of having it at my seat without having to deal with airport lines etc.
I’m only at 10k miles so far this year and most likely won’t be doing any more flying, so an extra 375 miles isn’t really going to make the difference here (plus it’s below the 500 mile threshold that AS would normally be willing to grace anyway).
Sounds like X it is.
I’m only at 10k miles so far this year and most likely won’t be doing any more flying, so an extra 375 miles isn’t really going to make the difference here (plus it’s below the 500 mile threshold that AS would normally be willing to grace anyway).
Sounds like X it is.
Saver: 5400 ÷ (500 min × 1.50) = 7.20 cpm
Main: 6900 ÷ (500 min × 1.50) = 9.20 cpm
First: 9900 ÷ (500 min × 1.75 × 1.5) = 7.54 cpm
It appears that Saver will serve you best with your current earnings and anticipated flying as the EQM doesn't come into play for you. It certainlty makes sense for everyone to make the analysis for themselves.
Other's who are anticipating earning a higher Tier may opt for First. The cpm cost is only slightly more, 0.34 cents. With that comes a guaranteed seat in First Class and Alaska Lounge access if available on the route. Also, if you need to check baggage and don't otherwise have a baggage fee waiver the cpm tips in favour of First.
James