paseom2

I am with tnj100. AA is not (usually) the cheapest for me for business travel however it is within the allowable parameters of corp travel. I may be purchasing AA's cheapest ticket at any given time, but the Aadvantage program keeps me buying AA instead of UA, etc. If no miles given, why would I continue to pay more?

mvoight

I understand your view, but I don't quite understand this discussion of no miles for cheap fares. Are there new fares that aren't earning miles?
My $49 fares to OC earn miles. My sub $500 tickets to Europe have earned miles. I have never bought a fare on AA.COM that has not earned mileage. I know that some consolidators and special negotiated fares might not be miles earning, but I haven't see a decrease in the number of miles in all of the cheap tickets I buy.

tnj100

I think it's based on the pure speculation that the AAdvantage program may change to have low-priced fares earn fewer (or zero) miles than they currently do.

If this change happens (and I'm not in any way implying that I think it will), it would cause a good number of AAdvantage members to re-think their airline buying habits.

brooks5018

As we all know the airlines are big copycats. One airline raises fares, introduces a promotion, implements new fees, lowers fares, etc. they all do. Many within hours/days of each other. There are many recent examples of this.

What makes anyone think that if AA were to no longer give miles on all fares, UA/CO/DL wouldn't follow suit? All the talk of leaving AA if they were to implement this change is premature until you see how the other big airlines react.

bernardd

Isn't this exactly what FF schemes are all about? If you can argue for those few dollars on the basis of convenience, efficiency etc etc. then AA needs to leverage the loyalty its built and get those dollars, while at the same time having the lowest price that gets it to the top of the comparison shoppers lists.

Basically it can't do both unless it can make itself more efficient than every other carrier, so I still think one mistake is its lack of differntiation between "business" and "leisure" products.

Whether it will attempt to achieve differentiate by changes to AAdvantage remains to be seen.

mvoight

If other carriers don't follow suit, then it seems like this would be a big problem for AA. I think that is a bit too much speculation at this point.

tnj100

That's mostly, but not absolutely, true.

For me, AAdvantage is the best of the loyalty programs currently out there. I choose to fly AA more than any other airline because of it. It gives them a competitive advantage. It's the primary reason I fly AA.

If AA changes the program and the others don't follow suit, presumably I will re-evaluate and decide if the 'new' AAdvantage is still that much better than the alternative loyalty schemes. If something else is better, I will likely change my travel habits. This is probably bad for AA.

If AA changes the program and the others all mirror it, I think the value of the loyalty schemes will have been fundamentally changed for me. The loyalty program - which right now is second only to price level in my buying decision - may fall completely out of my buying decision. There's a good chance that I just won't care about miles (because I won't be accruing them all that often), and thus, I won't go out of my way to fly AA. This is probably also bad for AA.

Right now, AA is my default carrier because of AAdvantage. If it changes dramatically, I'll re-evaluate who (if any) my new default will be.

tom911

Wasn't it Delta that went to 50% mileage on discounted fares about 6-7 years ago and had to back down after a defection of flyers? Maybe it would have held if other carriers matched, but in that instance no one did. In the competitive environment right now, I'm not sure any airline wants to take the risk of losing flyers.

tnj100

I would argue that AA does differentiate between 'business' and 'leisure' products by the implementation of elite status.

Let's face it, the AA experience as an EXP is far better than it is without status, and with the exception of a few enthusiasts, EXPs are business travelers. The correlation between business travelers and AA Elites is probably very high - so they've cleverly created a differentiated product, but tied it to loyalty as well as $$ spent.

MrMan

Add to the fact there biggest competitor in their two big markets Texas and Chicago is WN who won't go along

schriste

CO threatened only 50% mileage on lowest fares about 5 years ago… and I instantly left for AA. CO back pedaled before implementing it so you get 100% if you buy on co.com, but I think there may still be some purchase channels where you only get 50% even today.

Ha! The joke was on me as I left for AA because they had meals in coach, MRTC, magazines on board, pillows and blankets, and no copays on international mileage upgrade awards.

bernardd

Wow, there's an interesting EXP-centric view of life! Ummmm, I'd agree that a majority of EXP's are travelling for business and spending OPM. I wouldn't be surprised however to find that the total spend of OPM is several times greater than the total spent by EXP's.

Somehow you make a link from EXP to "AA Elites", and I'm not privy to the numbers, but I'd speculate the number of GLD + PLT's could well be 10x the number of EXP's. How strong do you think the benefits for those are? My personal experience is not strong enough to keep me loyal - I use BA & WN more often than AA. And they're certain not enough for me to fly extra miles to get the extra status.

Is EXP really a differentiated product? Is it radically different to CO or UA or DL? Yes, there are differences, but when I travelled enough to maintain that status, I wanted convenient flights more than anything else, and I ended up with AA because it had more flights on the routes I used.

And what's all this got to do with miles on deep discount coach? I really think AA wants / needs to be courting those paying for flexible Coach, Business and First tickets. Or at least squeezing an extra $50 off each $400 coach ticket.

aaupgrade

From an EXP who earns status using MOM, as opposed to OPM, I primarily look for 2 things.

1. Price, and since I purchase AONEx and ACIRnn products AA has been winning on that account up until now (just purchased AONE3 for $6641 4 weeks ago).
2. Ability to upgrade, AND there is no additional charge for domestic upgrades for EXP, AND I have had a 100% success rate with upgrades clearing as a EXP and previously a Plat, AND I have had success using my SWUs. A friend who is 1K on UA just returned on UA from San Deigo to IAD, and he said there were 57 1Ks on the plane. I told him I had another friend who has been a UA 1K for years and had a dismal success rate at upgrades clearing. This friend confirmed what the other one had told me, that in their experience domestic upgrades clear less than 50% of the time. Now I am based in DC metro area, and that is one of the BIG reasons I don't fly UA. I would rather connect and fly up front all the time, and get good rates on RTW tickets and YUP fares, than have a direct connection.

GeneCMH

One speculative idea not yet mentioned... I could see AA going with a fourth tier around 125K or 150K (maybe even 200K if the bennies warrant it).

Seems to make sense as there are probably a number of people who switch flying once crossing over 100K. Especially this year with the DEQM, I am now over 100k and there are still 7 months of flying to be had - its not like I'm going to stay home all those weekends, but as it stands there's little value in continuing to fly AA other than getting closer to the 2MM.

Don't know what the benefits of a 4th tier would be but imagine something worthwhile. Could also fit in with JonNYC's comments about it being both positive and negative - depending on which side of the 4th tier you're on.

SeeBuyFly

I had this impression that to get the primary benefits of status (bonus miles, upgrades), you have to fly (after having achieved the status). But apparently achieving status is an end in itself?