joe_miami

Do we really want airlines requesting health records to support such claims? Or are they just supposed to take people's word for it?

We're talking about EXP here, not Hyatt Discoverist.

catcher1

What is an eight grade level?

enpremiere

Emoji mastery

Nicoolio

I believe BA, and maybe CX and AC too have grace periods you can use if all of a sudden your travel patterns change and miss a long-held status for a year.

I'm a bit surprised AA wouldn't give somebody with 10 straight years of CK a year grace period particularly since even if they have a cap on the number of CKs, one would think historic performance value would be part of the formula since there is likely a correlation to future spend. For example, somebody like OP who has qualified as CK for 10 straight years would seemingly be more likely have a higher profit impact in the future than the very last person who is qualifying for the first time and wouldn't even know he or she missed it.

bitterproffit

Dave Noble

Maybe it is part of the formula that AA uses, yet still the OP didn't meet AA's criteria for mainaining access to the CK service

Givem that he has had CK for so long, I am surprised that the OP is so aware of how awful travel would be these days as merely an EP member

With any invitation only memberships with no advertised criteria for being eligible, then need to accept that the invitation can be rescinded. This whole scheme is purely a business relationshop - the OP just didn't give enough business

If he decides that UA is a better choice for his travel, then that should be a simple business decision. If he was to build his spend up with AA again, it might well grant him CK access again in the future

mnhusker

This is reading at "eight grade level".

OP already is an EXP, but this poster can't seem to make that connection.

mnhusker

If you remember airlines in the past have asked for "Dr's letters" for all kinds things related to travel so this is not a new issue.

Again, the bigger picture is lost on you, it's about whether AA is interested in keeping a major customer, one who has been highly lucrative in the past, and who is likely to continue to be so in the future. The OP is asking AA to show some loyalty back, "betting that past performance will predict future behavior", recent back surgery not withstanding. Remember, even with surgery he only fell to EXP, not GOLD!!!

With the 10 year track record of spending, if I was AA, I would make that bet, give him CK and then monitor his performance for three months to see if my bet was a good one. AA has little to lose and much to gain in three months of that wager versus what they are doing now.

reeg2

Either AA is being foolish, or AA knows more about the situation than we do. Perhaps OP's situation isn't so cut and dry?
In the end, OP has to make a decision; they obviously have and why should I care?

Dave Noble

In the bigger picture, AA knows what it is looking for in order to grant / continue CK services to people - it has all the knowledge of spending and has made a determination on what it wants to do. In 3 months, perhaps the OP would trigger a review to grant it again

If AA thought that the OP was that important a customer, it might well have renewed - perhaps the OP's view of his importance to the airline doesn't match the airline's view of the importance of the OP

andersonCooper

I can't comment on BA or AC but I would like to point out each program has its good and bad, CX does have membership holiday, but also comes with extremely tough qualification requirements, membership year CP reset and confusing MPC and AM systems as well as AM hard expiration policy, on top of no life time status at all. Grass not always greener, at least not on the CX side.

Nicoolio

I wasn't asserting grass was greener anywhere else but pointing our other programs have a 'holiday' feature.

As mentioned, it seems odd AA wouldn't place a higher value on somebody who was 10 straight years a CK and intended to be back at that qualifying level than the very last batch of people who made the cut for the first time. As somebody who has had some exposure (not hands on) to how companies try to predict future value, it would sound like AA doesn't have that facility based on this example. On the other hand, it could be that AA does indeed value past performance, which maybe kept OP a CK in past years, so I guess it's hard to tell.

joe_miami

A few stories like this each year are probably a net positive for AA and the other airlines, since they're a stark reminder to the status-obsessed masses that they better keep spending.

Antarius

in theory, yes. But given its stock performance relative to peers and yet again guidance cut, I'm not sure that it's a safe assumption that AA is making the best decision for the long term.

AA has shown a ongoing lack of flexibility in policies across the board. The numbers indicate this may be starting to bite them.

Dave Noble

I am sure that the OP appreciated the exclusivity of the club when he was a member - now that he is on the outside trying to get in, now there is a problem with the exclusivity

If AA didnt have restrictive criteria for membership, then it wouldn't be able to provide the level of service or that the OP craves

Who here knows if one of those years was due to AA being flexible on another lower spend year?

In the end, if UA better meets his needs, it would be silly for him to stay with AA suffer having to get by with lowly EP status on its own - does seem that he will only have the UA equivalent when he moves

Given that it is only January, he may receive a membership card in time for start of the status membership year on 1st February anyway