AA 2018 year in review
Dec 24, 2018, 6:47 am
#121
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Roswell, GA
Programs: AA EXP 2.8m,Lifetime PLT, Hilton Diamond, IHG PlLT, SPG Gold
Posts: 3,191
64 hours in the sky
5.5 times around the world
5 destinations visited
Top 7 % of EXP
146,673 bonus miles from elite status
Of course the destinations are all wrong.. been to DC once, yet it listed as visited often
qualified in July 1st is right
5.5 times around the world
5 destinations visited
Top 7 % of EXP
146,673 bonus miles from elite status
Of course the destinations are all wrong.. been to DC once, yet it listed as visited often
qualified in July 1st is right
Dec 24, 2018, 7:01 am
#122
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Boston, MA
Programs: AA 1MM EXP, DL Diamond, Hilton Diamond, Bonvoy Ambassador (RIP SPG), Aeroplan 75K
Posts: 1,155
Notwithstanding a few flights left before year-end:
164,997 EQMs, 27,702 EQDs, and 138 segments.
- 243 hours
- 4.5 times around the world (I mostly fly along the east coast, some mid-cons, a few trans-cons, and had four long-haul trips this year)
- 20 destinations visited (seemed light)
- Boston, Tampa and NY were the top three (Boston is my home base)
- LAX-HND was my longest flight
- 737 was my most frequented aircraft, although I feel like I’ve been on the A321 more often (probably because it’s so stripped down)
- Top 23% of EXP based on miles
- 164k bonus miles
- 90+ upgrades - I don’t have my spreadsheet in front of me, but my success percentage on eligible flights is ~93%
- 375k miles redeemed (and four SWUs)
164,997 EQMs, 27,702 EQDs, and 138 segments.
- 243 hours
- 4.5 times around the world (I mostly fly along the east coast, some mid-cons, a few trans-cons, and had four long-haul trips this year)
- 20 destinations visited (seemed light)
- Boston, Tampa and NY were the top three (Boston is my home base)
- LAX-HND was my longest flight
- 737 was my most frequented aircraft, although I feel like I’ve been on the A321 more often (probably because it’s so stripped down)
- Top 23% of EXP based on miles
- 164k bonus miles
- 90+ upgrades - I don’t have my spreadsheet in front of me, but my success percentage on eligible flights is ~93%
- 375k miles redeemed (and four SWUs)
Dec 25, 2018, 8:46 am
#123
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 50
I did not receive the Year in Review email. I am CK - are there other CKs that did not receive the email? I checked spam folder - nothing.
I think I can calculate my miles flown by subtracting million miler total from last year from my current total because I believe they only count BIS miles now. 206,853.
I think I can calculate my miles flown by subtracting million miler total from last year from my current total because I believe they only count BIS miles now. 206,853.
Dec 25, 2018, 2:16 pm
#124
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: I 35 south bound, finally stopped
Programs: LT Plt, 4mm, *A GLD, burned out medical provider, executing our estate plan
Posts: 1,665
Dec 26, 2018, 8:01 am
#125
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New York
Programs: AA EXP 1.0mm, not sure where I am with hotels these days
Posts: 2,795
I reported it to AA as soon as I got the original email yesterday and they said they were going to forward it to AAdvantage.
I got an email from their Chief Privacy Officer this afternoon, seemingly sent to all members who clicked the share link, and just received a call to notify me that they inadvertently shared private information and that corporate security is going to monitor my account for fraudulent activity as a result. Seems they’ve resolved the issue and are taking it seriously.
Dec 26, 2018, 12:48 pm
#126
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: SFO
Programs: Aegean (Gold) American (EP)
Posts: 150
Here's mine to add to the graph:
202 hours in the sky
6.5 times flown around the world
22 destinations visited
San Francisco (home), New York (2nd office), Fukuoka most visited destinations (only went to FUK once)
San Francisco - Melbourne (7,855 miles) furthest flight taken
Airbus A321 type of aircraft most flown
May 21 EP earned
Top 4% rank among Executive Platinum members (based on miles flown)
10+ upgrades received
$800 checked bag savings
For reference, I am currently EP, and will have EP next year. Here are my ytd numbers with two flights remaining:
$78.5 EQD
315K EQM
84 EQS
202 hours in the sky
6.5 times flown around the world
22 destinations visited
San Francisco (home), New York (2nd office), Fukuoka most visited destinations (only went to FUK once)
San Francisco - Melbourne (7,855 miles) furthest flight taken
Airbus A321 type of aircraft most flown
May 21 EP earned
Top 4% rank among Executive Platinum members (based on miles flown)
10+ upgrades received
$800 checked bag savings
For reference, I am currently EP, and will have EP next year. Here are my ytd numbers with two flights remaining:
$78.5 EQD
315K EQM
84 EQS
Dec 26, 2018, 4:06 pm
#127
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: COU
Programs: AA EXP, Bonvoy Ambassador, Hertz PC
Posts: 499
Fanger, you're really crushing it in this thread. Awesome stuff. Couple comments...
Yes, definitely agree! A lack of data is just a lack of data, and making assumptions about why it's missing is likely to lead us astray.
Maybe. I think it's possible that partner flights either aren't represented or are poorly represented, and that could account for some of the outliers. This also might not be uniform...it's easy to imagine a situation where Iberia credits right but Finnair shows up by EQM or not at all. We don't appear to have enough information about everybody's partner flying to really say what's happening there. 
The wording on the emails doesn't seem to agree with that...if the few CKs who have posted were accurate, they said x% of CKs in their emails, not x% of EXP. If the CKs are showing up as the outliers I'd say it's definitely screwing things up. If they're right on the curve where we expect them to be, then I guess they aren't 
Yes, this clearly explains at least some of the outliers; nice catch. I don't know whether it explains all of them however. It would be hard to know (unless of course every outlier in your table replied and confirmed they hadn't requalled yet), but having established one bug in AA's data handling, I don't see any reason to assume it's the only one. Like I said above I could also see partner flight handling as an area likely to cause problems. I'd also think IRROPs, SWU-reticketing, AAVacations, and anything else that tends to cause weird EQM/EQD posting might factor in.
Not that it really matters of course. Whether the reasons are just one bug or many, the outliers are clearly in error. And ignoring them, the curve is just really obvious.
One other note: did you see ryanbriar's post with 4.5RW/23% above? That's interesting...not sure if it's just more outlier data, or whether things dramatically flatten out below 4.5; of course depending on how they're rounding you guys could be as close as .5RW.
1. When I initially got the email and checked this thread, it was clear to me that some effort was made not to have every email be identical in format. For instance, my email didn't have anything about trips to the sun.
2. Thus when I saw that not all the emails were quoting Top % of Explat (or other status), I did not take that to mean that those individuals did not rank highly in percentile terms- several clearly had flown more than me at Top 25% and 3x RTW.
2. Thus when I saw that not all the emails were quoting Top % of Explat (or other status), I did not take that to mean that those individuals did not rank highly in percentile terms- several clearly had flown more than me at Top 25% and 3x RTW.
New hypothesis with respect to outliers: the outliers are for current Explat members who had not yet requalified for Explat 2019-Jan 31 2020. I.e. the reported top% is based on current BIS for projected 2019 status based only on EQM/EQD the day of email. So current ExPlat only requalified for Plat or Plat pro based on Dec 21 EQD/EQM have their Top% calculated based on that tier, screwing up the chart. Can anyone confirm or deny?
See Tbone14's post... he hasn't quite requalified yet, but will, and he is an outlier.
See Tbone14's post... he hasn't quite requalified yet, but will, and he is an outlier.
Not that it really matters of course. Whether the reasons are just one bug or many, the outliers are clearly in error. And ignoring them, the curve is just really obvious.
One other note: did you see ryanbriar's post with 4.5RW/23% above? That's interesting...not sure if it's just more outlier data, or whether things dramatically flatten out below 4.5; of course depending on how they're rounding you guys could be as close as .5RW.
Dec 27, 2018, 12:10 pm
#129
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Oakland
Programs: AA Explat, UA former 1K + PremExec, DL
Posts: 1,151
Updated Chart
I added a * to the names to mark CK members. I do understand the current distinction between CK and EXP but had made the assumption that statistics queries for CK would have remained within the EXP category. I realize this assumption isn't justified, but the results don't contradict it yet.
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
A couple of people mentioned their percentile ranking and EQM, but not the # times ROW.
Leaving aside the outliers, the observed distribution doesn't seem implausible to me. There's only so much a large population of frequent fliers can fly, and a long tail of very frequent long-haul fliers is expected I think. Especially in a binned distribution as with the RTW metric I could expect a steep drop off over one or two bins.
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
A couple of people mentioned their percentile ranking and EQM, but not the # times ROW.
Leaving aside the outliers, the observed distribution doesn't seem implausible to me. There's only so much a large population of frequent fliers can fly, and a long tail of very frequent long-haul fliers is expected I think. Especially in a binned distribution as with the RTW metric I could expect a steep drop off over one or two bins.
Dec 27, 2018, 12:30 pm
#130
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Programs: AA PPro, 1MM
Posts: 505
I added a * to the names to mark CK members. I do understand the current distinction between CK and EXP but had made the assumption that statistics queries for CK would have remained within the EXP category. I realize this assumption isn't justified, but the results don't contradict it yet.
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
A couple of people mentioned their percentile ranking and EQM, but not the # times ROW.
Leaving aside the outliers, the observed distribution doesn't seem implausible to me. There's only so much a large population of frequent fliers can fly, and a long tail of very frequent long-haul fliers is expected I think. Especially in a binned distribution as with the RTW metric I could expect a steep drop off over one or two bins.
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
A couple of people mentioned their percentile ranking and EQM, but not the # times ROW.
Leaving aside the outliers, the observed distribution doesn't seem implausible to me. There's only so much a large population of frequent fliers can fly, and a long tail of very frequent long-haul fliers is expected I think. Especially in a binned distribution as with the RTW metric I could expect a steep drop off over one or two bins.
Dec 27, 2018, 1:02 pm
#131
Join Date: May 2017
Location: San Francisco
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 369
I added a * to the names to mark CK members. I do understand the current distinction between CK and EXP but had made the assumption that statistics queries for CK would have remained within the EXP category. I realize this assumption isn't justified, but the results don't contradict it yet.
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
...
Of the 5 outliers, 3 have confirmed that they had not yet requalified for 2019 EXP (tjcxx, phazeowt, tbone14) 2 have not said (Lavezzi and bpauker). Perhaps they are using the same database query as they use for the buy-up emails, which clearly neglect planned/booked travel.
...
All data includes activity posted through December 12, 2018.
Dec 27, 2018, 2:14 pm
#133
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Cary, NC
Programs: AA 1MM; DL DM; Global Entry; MR Gold; HH Gold; Nat'l EC
Posts: 562
For 2018:
- 110 hours
- 2x around the world
- 10 destinations visited
- longest flight CDG - ORD
- Most visited RDU (home airport), LHR, LAX
- $150 in checked bag savings, but as I rarely check a bag, this seems suspect
Dec 27, 2018, 2:57 pm
#134
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: DCA
Programs: AA EXP sad former CK, Bonvoy LT Plat, BAEC Gold, VS, former UA, UA no longer, never, ever, QF
Posts: 228
CK data
264 hrs
5.5 x around the world
15 destinations
LAX - LHR longest hope (5457 miles)
A321 most common aircraft flown
Top 7% of CK
313k miles from elite status
695k award miles w/o flying
20+ upgrades received
$720 in saved bag fees
5.5 x around the world
15 destinations
LAX - LHR longest hope (5457 miles)
A321 most common aircraft flown
Top 7% of CK
313k miles from elite status
695k award miles w/o flying
20+ upgrades received
$720 in saved bag fees
Dec 27, 2018, 9:23 pm
#135
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: COU
Programs: AA EXP, Bonvoy Ambassador, Hertz PC
Posts: 499
I added a * to the names to mark CK members. I do understand the current distinction between CK and EXP but had made the assumption that statistics queries for CK would have remained within the EXP category. I realize this assumption isn't justified, but the results don't contradict it yet.
Leaving aside the outliers, the observed distribution doesn't seem implausible to me. There's only so much a large population of frequent fliers can fly, and a long tail of very frequent long-haul fliers is expected I think. Especially in a binned distribution as with the RTW metric I could expect a steep drop off over one or two bins.
Anyway, great work, glad you've kept going with this ^