physioprof

Since by definition we're talking about frequent travelers here, the effective annual fee of the CSR is really only $150, since you get an annual $300 travel credit. And they give you a Global Entry/TSA Pre fee credit every three years. And no foreign transaction fees on CSR (dunno about United branded Chase cards).

For these reasons and the other ones discussed above, it's not at all surprising that CSR is a big problem for UA's relationship with Chase.

RNE

This!

IMHO, United has a weak bargaining position. For if push comes to shove and UA goes to another bank (thus ending conversions of URs into MPs) I'd still stick with my CSR card rather than a United card (assuming the hypothetical new bank's UA card offers substantially similar benefits). Why? The convertibility of URs is the bomb—even if it loses UA as a partner.

Of course, I'd always prefer Chase and UA stay hitched, but I wouldn't mind some marriage counseling that results in UA's card (indeed, all of Chase's non-UR cards) escaping 5/24.

emcampbe

Fair enough. Still, some may not use it right away, and may not want to set out $450 fee. Just because one is relatively financially healthy, doesn't mean they want to spend big, especially if they have other big expenses at the time (home renovations, an expanding family, etc.). The fee credit for GE/Pre doesn't even help some folks - for example, I have Nexus, because I have family there and travel there multiple times a year - 3-4 at minimum. $50 for 5 years, IME, is well more than worth it, but Chase wouldn't re-imburse for that - I tried calling and submitting a secure message for both myself and wife (2 different cards) - they wouldn't budge for either of us.


UA going to another bank for their co-branded cards and allowing UR to MP transfer are two separate pieces. Now, perhaps UA wouldn't want that ideally. I don't know if allowing the transfer of UR to MP, and the co-brand card deal, are on one and the same contract currently, but there's no reason why they have to be. UR points transfer, IIRC, to partners for who they don't issue co-branded cards for. SQ, for example.

RNE

Correct. United could move its cards from JPMorgan Chase & Co. to, say, Citigroup Inc. without any provision for the conversion of ThankYou Points into MileagePlus miles. Or, such a conversion arrangement could be established. It's up to the airline and bank involved.

I'm not trying to pin down exactly what United and Chase may do; I'm simply opining that United has genuine cause for concern that its cards' proliferation and use are undermined by...

1. Chase's CSR card
2. Chase's 5/24 rule

Now, are there reasons people would nevertheless choose to use United's cards despite the concerns I innumerate? Sure. Still, anything undermining its cards should be of concern to United. So it's not surprising talks are taking place.

RNE, anecdotally presenting myself as Exhibit A, having an Explorer card I don't use to buy United tickets.

P.S. Marriott Corp. should be similarly concerned. I have the Marriott Rewards card but I don't use it to pay for stays.

cplush

I think this just speaks to a larger underlying problem with airline credit cards since american is also saying their CC revenue isn't meeting their projections. There just isn't any value for the traditional 2x airline purchases/1x all else when compared to most program agnostic cards. sure 5/24 probably plays a role, but these programs have been devalued how many times but the mileage earning hasn't been adjust at all. total erosion of value on the CC's that no one seems to want to address since it probably impacts overall contract value.

g8trgr8t

Down goes 5/24 for all cobranded chase cards.....a guy can only hope.

Statman

Wrong.

The CSR annual fee is $450. That $300 "travel credit" everyone keeps harping about is still YOUR money which you have to spend in order to be eligible for said "credit."

Oreto

If I'm not mistaken, this has been an issue before with the Sapphire Preferred. I'm sketchy on details (sucks getting old) and perhaps others can chime in but I seem to recall that UA had a problem of people not putting spend on the Explorer card. The gist was that the spend put on that card dried up as people seemed to favor using their CSP due to the dividend plus the point flexibility. In response to that, the 25K spend bonus on the Explorer card was instituted. However, this made the Club card a tougher sale going forward which may have also annoyed UA. Those with the grandfathered pre-merger cards had some advantages even though those have been eroded over time.

RNE

Ummm... you're kidding, right?

Fair point. The CSP may have fomented the erosion of United's cards, but the CSR was the coup de grâce. And although you didn't mention it, let me reiterate to the forum readers that Chase's 5/24 rule is more problematic for United than many care to acknowledge. Now, does that mean there will be any appreciable changes? No. The machinations could remain behind the scenes. And any changes we do see could be detrimental to us. But, regardless, I'm convinced United isn't going to keep things status quo.

Statman

No I am not kidding. The CSR annual fee is $450 which you pay out of pocket annually as a card holder.

At the end of the day that $300 "travel credit" is your own money and not something the Chase gives to you as an extra bonus. Keep in mind that the $300 "travel credit" doesn't magically appear in your account which automatically applies whether or not you actually purchase any "travel" related services that qualify. Instead, Chase gives you a "refund" of up to $300 if you purchase said "travel" related services that qualify.

If you can't understand the difference between a "credit" and a "refund", I don't know what else to tell you.

RNE

The word "effective" intrinsically recognizes the distinction you're making. Granted, if a CSR cardholder has no travel expenses, then the $300 credit doesn't impact their effective annual fee.

There are many things I don't understand, but I do understand what a distinction without a difference is.

emcampbe

I'm not sure 5/24 really affects the majority of people. Flyertalk is a minescule part of Chase's CC clients, or an airline's FFers. While certainly many on here extrapolate the affects because they play the game, and certainly bloggers are promoting it, IME, 5/24 is really likely affecting only a few outliers (in general terms), of Chase's customers/potential customers. Does it add up to thousands of clients. Sure, maybe. But on a grand scale, I really think its a very, very small percentage. And I'm not sure balking because of 5/24 alone is really a good strategy. I suppose it could be a 'straw that broke the camels back' kind of thing.

As for my experience, at our household, I have one UA card (select) and wife has two (select and TB). Despite getting PQMs and 3x on Select purchases on UA.com, we still use the CSR for it - not specifically for the extra points, but because of the insurance the other cards don't come with. Why did that start? Didn't have anything to do with the cards but the kid - once we were traveling with an infant/toddler, the risk of needing insurance goes way up (It was the CSP before the CSR came out). We spend our minimum on our UA cards first, then switch to other cards as primary. We don't always need the waiver, but often don't know until close to the end of the year, so we mae sure we have it to fall back on if needed.

Everyone's needs are different. As mentioned above, I do the PQD waiver amount on my UA CC because unless I know I don't need that for the year, I want that as a back up. I have a PMUA card, which also gets me 2x miles on groceries, drug stores, etc. So even if I hit my minimum, I continue to use the Select for those categories which make the most sense.

The CSR, etc. are definitely a threat to all airline-branded cards, especially as the loyalty game is becoming more difficult with the changes. If UA (or other carriers) really wants to compete with that, they'll likely have to add card benefits - otherwise, people are less inclined to be loyal if its harder for them to get what they want with their loyalty. I actually think the TB card is a step in the right direction - its more unique. It's no fee, which means (aside from 5/24), there's no reason why one (with a decent credit profile) couldn't get it, and for me, as a UA loyalist, I earn $ back to use for tickets I'm buying multiple times a year anyway (and I still earn RDM/PQM/PQD). My wife has it...I'll get one at some point in the not to distant future. Not as flexible as cash back, and I suppose a PITA if we eventually switch carriers (which I dont' see happening based on the places we go and UA/partners much better way to get us there), but it works for us - and in a lot of ways better than actual mileage, at least, IMO.

Kacee

I've basically stopped using my Explorer in favor of CSP and AMEX Plat because I don't really want any more UA miles (sitting on 330K right now, with no redemptions in sight). United's made it too hard to use the miles.

beachfan

If you don't mind me asking, are you looking for one seat or two?

Thanks in advance!

mikesyr18

It's a credit card for travelers. It's ridiculous that people actually think any average Joe should have the Chase Sapphire Reserve. If you're not using up the entire $300 travel credit every year, you're not the type of person that should be carrying the card.

Perhaps in year two you pay the $450 annual fee and then decide to take advantage of the $100 TSA pre-check credit, take advantage of Priority Pass lounges six times, use benefits of the Luxury Hotel Collection five times, utilize the roadside assistance feature twice, and transfer 100,000 earned points to Hyatt... Do you think Chase is reimbursing you your own money now, or are they paying for those travel benefits since you've used the other ones first?

You don't know for a fact that Chase is keeping your annual fee in a vault, only to give you $300 of it back just because you incurred travel fees a few months later. It's better to stick to facts than speculation.