View Poll Results: My plans for dealing with the 2016 AAdvantage changes:
I'm actually benefitting from this - good deal for me.
46
6.80%
I'm neutral - I gain some, lose some. I'll stay.
132
19.53%
I'm not happy, but stuck with AA / oneworld at this point.
176
26.04%
I'm unhappy & will use AA & other airlines opportunistically.
274
40.53%
I'm outta here! Bye, American.
48
7.10%
Voters: 676. You may not vote on this poll
AAdvantage Changes for 2016 - DISCUSSION, REACTION & POLL
May 23, 2016, 5:03 pm
#1171
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2006
Programs: AAdvantage PP
Posts: 13,913
I agree with you. I think anyone who believes AA isn't going to add some sort of spend qualification criteria is dreaming. In fact, I think it would be surprising if it didn't very closely or exactly mirror the DL and UA systems. It isn't a question of if, but rather when.
May 23, 2016, 7:50 pm
#1172
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Usually in SAN or Central Europe.
Programs: AA:EXP/1MM. Accor/Radisson:Silver; HH:Gold; ICH:Plt Amb.
Posts: 22,307
I also concur. One thing I will tell you about "Big Marketing" now its all based upon big data. If big data shows no adverse impact of going to a spend requirement for elite status (as UA, DL and WN have determined) to think Doug Parker and company will not do so for some kind of "kindness" aspect is strange thinking indeed.
May 23, 2016, 9:06 pm
#1173
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast
Programs: AA CONCIERGE KEY & 1MM, HILTON DIAMOND
Posts: 11,970
Actually, WN doesn't have a spend requirement. One can fly 50 OW segments at the cheapest fare available, and they will attain the top elite status. I think I'd rather have AA adopt a 50% EQM earning for the cheapest fares (similar to the former EQP model) instead of having minimum spend requirements for each elite level. It would make it easier with regards to partner flights.
May 23, 2016, 9:17 pm
#1175
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,224
May 23, 2016, 9:21 pm
#1176
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
May 24, 2016, 8:29 am
#1177
Join Date: Apr 2014
Programs: QF CX
Posts: 67
Relocating to the NYC - worth keeping my DM with CX and just use OWE when flying AA switch to AA (assuming they will match).
Assuming being EXP you will get better treatment than just a OWE...
3-4 Domestic trip per month, 6 flights a year to Aus (perhaps 2 or 3 of those via HK). All Y class, so seat availability and upgrades etc are important.
Could go back to QF (most flight to Aus and service MEL/BNE as weel) but when I was PL I didn't feel that I got treat THAT much better service than a OW Emerald, unlike CX where DM's get treated MUCH better than OWE (OP ups, seat availability etc).
Would AA fir best, even if it means flying QF/CX time to time?
How to compare to DL or UA?
is this even the right thread to ask this?
Assuming being EXP you will get better treatment than just a OWE...
3-4 Domestic trip per month, 6 flights a year to Aus (perhaps 2 or 3 of those via HK). All Y class, so seat availability and upgrades etc are important.
Could go back to QF (most flight to Aus and service MEL/BNE as weel) but when I was PL I didn't feel that I got treat THAT much better service than a OW Emerald, unlike CX where DM's get treated MUCH better than OWE (OP ups, seat availability etc).
Would AA fir best, even if it means flying QF/CX time to time?
How to compare to DL or UA?
is this even the right thread to ask this?
May 24, 2016, 9:21 am
#1180
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
May 24, 2016, 9:48 am
#1181
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SFO/JFK/MGA
Programs: UA 1P MM, AA-PP, AS, DL, HH G, SPG Gold, TA nada
Posts: 2,043
To me, it doesn't make any sense to do it in Sept/Oct (from another thread) or this year at all. Start out next year so people have a whole year to meet spend.
May 24, 2016, 10:00 am
#1182
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: SJC
Programs: AA EXP, BA Silver, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton diamond, Marriott Platinum
Posts: 33,533
We seem to have separate conversations intertwined here:
A bunch of posts seem to be mixing these things up.
Cheers.
- Spend-based earning of RDM - announced already for "second half of 2016"
- Spend-based earning of EQM - not really much discussion about this, just
some confusion, it appears - Spend levels as minimum for status levels - not announced at all, but under discussion and speculation.
A bunch of posts seem to be mixing these things up.
Cheers.
Last edited by brp; May 24, 2016 at 11:57 am
May 24, 2016, 11:07 am
#1183
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: FIND ME ON TWITTER FOR THE LATEST
Posts: 27,730
There's no "meet[ing] the spend" in this context, as BRP points out. My posts were pertaining, specifically, to coming-- already announced-- RDM changes.
May 24, 2016, 11:28 am
#1184
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SFO/JFK/MGA
Programs: UA 1P MM, AA-PP, AS, DL, HH G, SPG Gold, TA nada
Posts: 2,043
I understand that. I am simply saying it would make a lot of sense to me to just start all of it on January 1, 2017 to avoid confusion. But I am a layperson by all means. I have tried to explain this to many acquaintances and they usually can't seem to wrap their heads around it.
May 24, 2016, 12:54 pm
#1185
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 5,270
It would indeed be nice if they announced a date, and if that date were reasonably far in advance. However, there's nothing "special" about Jan. 1 that would make that date any better than others. I'd much rather they announce now that (for instance) the change is happening Aug. 1, rather than announcing Dec. 15 that the change will happen Jan. 1.