Maintaining Status... Defies 4th grade logic (to merge)
 

I recently inquired about options to extend or maintain my EXP status and received an automated email immediately to pay $x,xxx to keep status. Finally I received an email reply (not automated) stating no consideration will be given. This is quite a slap in the face since my request cited I have exceeded the annual spend for EXP (requirement for 2017) and have not reached Gold.

To put in perspective: 1) I haven't reached Gold for 2016 (but will), 2) My spend through Sept 16 exceeds what WILL be required in 2017 for EXP, and 3) My spend through the end of 2016 will continue at typical higher rate...further surpassing the 2017 Spend requirement for EXP status if it were 2017. 4) Regardless of my spend in 2016, to keep my EXP status for 2017 I can pay a additional fee to AA of $x,xxx.


Or perhaps I am totally off base. Maybe AA airfares will drop so dramatically next year that trying to achieve per dollar spent would be difficult.

The minimum spend is in ADDITIONAL to the miles (EQM) requirment so just spending the cash does NOT get you EXP even in the future!

Not sure why you think AA should comp you EXP if your only flying enpugh to make Gold?

I guess I'll bite, AA published the requirements for status and for the 2016 earning year (2017 status) there is just a requirement to fly a certain number of miles or segments. For the 2017 earning year, there is a requirement for BOTH flying and spending. Not one or the other.

You can't just earn it by spending unless you have a negotiated contract - airpass or other.

So, is your conclusion that the EXP status is not worth $x,xxx to you? (Not sure why the dollar amount is a big secret, since I believe they extend the same offer to everyone).

No, it does not defy any logic at all. AA carefully calibrates its FFP, some would say more carefully than UA & DL. Specifically, only EXP's get unlimited domestic UG's. AA has therefore made a business decision to require a $ spend + a certain number of miles/segments.

AA, however, will allow you to buy your way out of the latter. It has offered you the latter. If you pony up, you will remain EXP. If you do not, you will drop to Gold. It is as simple as that.

Third grade logic. And it works pretty well.

1) This is nothing new.

2) The criteria for different status tiers are well known, and must be met annually.

3) You are being treated the same as everyone else.

I fail to understand the justification for high dudgeon here.

And we have a winner....

There is no spend requirement for 2016.
There are 3 published ways to make EXP for 2016, EQS, EQM, and EQP.
Nothing new here. In 2017, you will need to qualify by one of those methods PLUS the spend requirement.

Not quite right -- EQP went away at the start of 2016, so it's down to EQM and EQS.

Airline logic...
 

I don't know what constitutes airline logic, as nothing the airlines appear to do is logical, to me...(at least). However, what happens IF a flyer gets to 101K+ EQM miles at year end 2017, but spends only say $4000? What is their status then? Which factor has the greatest weight? [I'll bet $ spend] I haven't seen this addressed, and may have missed it in the thread. -- And for those of you who jump at the bait: now with the red/silver-barclay card, a $40K spend gets you $6000EQD --- 1/2 way to EXP, so in a way, there are multiple avenues to getting and maintaining EXP without meeting any of the stated requirements. Now that's airline logic.

It's not a matter of one metric being "weighted" above another. You must meet both EQD AND EQM/EQS requirements for a particular status level. Someone with 101K EQM's and 4000 EQD's would only get Gold status. And likewise, someone with 12,000 EQD's, but only 25K EQM's would only be Gold as well. So neither metric really outweighs the other.

thanks, your explanation is still largely a non-airline [real world] logical persons supposition of what the "facts' will be :: because as we observe here on FT: buy ups, buy ins, status matches, corporate rates/status, and challenges all occur frquently. --- Is it this way on other airlines?? I don't know, as my max status out there has only been under 50Kmiles/yr. All I know is that I am already thinking of cancelling my AA Citi world elite MC, buying flights on which ever airline makes the most $ and travel time sense {when before I'd take a 2+ hr lay over to fly AA to keep status}, and utilize the other Oneworld partners for international travel, especially those modern new super lux geared airlines with their sparkling product and often lower prices} cheers!

Since AA (under current rules) near year end allows pax to pay to retain status, looking ahead to Dec. 2017, I wonder if pax who would have qualified on miles or segments, but are short on $ (EQDs), be permitted to fly extra (in lieu of $) to retain status?--a sort of mini "challenge".:D

I agree - there doesn't seem to be the incentive that existed in the past to skip the direct flight now that the extra miles won't help me. In the past I may spend $3-4000 per year - but usually would get at least 50k miles and maybe 75k - once even 100k with maybe $5k spend. Now - that nets me gold at best as 25k miles rarely costs me $3k - and without status possibilities there is no reason to go out of my way to be loyal to a single airline. In the future - with the change fees alone - I may need to switch to SW. I have no problem with AA or any of the other airlines - the product is often inconsistent in terms of service - so price and time traveling will become the way tix are bought in the future for many of us.

I can see a day where one of the airlines will match SW with the change fees - maybe even baggage fees - and the others will have to follow.

I'm trying to figure out how one could spend >$12K and not be gold. Unless you were buying some very expensive short distance coach fares (e.g., I used to see $800 ORD>MSP), it doesn't add up.