Any link to show what fares qualify and what don't? I heard the lowest available fare was ok. Been trying to book a trip to LHR/CDG and hopping on the A332 Envoy seats.

I'm in the process of applying for the Presidential plus mastercard. I'm bummed that they can't waive the first year fee anymore- I'm not sure what part of the banking regulations prohibit waiving the annual fee of a credit card. Hopefully, my application made it in time before the offer was yanked. Also, I'm confused about what Scott said about the online revenue tracker in regards to the Presidential plus card. Was he referring to the PP card at all? If so, does this have to do with the "flex" EQM's you can earn with the card?

Another open question is the future of the million-miles programs. How will these be aligned?

Yes, looks like SBM12 saw this too. Fare reorganization again?

Well... I have to say that I'm not thrilled. RU's aren't useful for me especially in limited number. I'll fly nearly 200 EQM this year. In past years I appeciated the EUA's, however, as I'm in the air so much (322 hrs so far this year as per flightmemory.com) it isn't the SWU or RU availability that is a factor, it is the availability to use them that matters. I simply cannot do long range planning for personal trips (where I'd use the upgrades). By the time I see an opening to relax, there are no R fares. The reduction of fare class applicability hurts me (as opposed to my clients).

While I like the idea that we get more for higher thresholds, and accumulating revenue on both sides of the organization is good, bennies that you can't use, or don't get (reduced EUA's) have no value. Heck, I have 8 Air Canada upgrades that are just going to expire at year end.

Open up the usage availability for the top tier (s) and I'll be a big fan.

I think the fee-waived offer that was part of the Presidential Platinum status is the one that can no longer be offered. I don't think they mean the generic first year fee-waived offer that's been sitting out there for a while now.

The online revenue tracker is for Presidential Plat status, and has nothing to do with the card or flex EQMs.

Yes, I too am disappointed at the loss of the credit for the card fee. I'd like to see the regulation that prevents a fee refund or credit. He wasn't refrring to the card apart from the no fee coments. The revenue tracking is for ticket revenue and is not associated with the card.

It isn't the first year fee that is being waived... it is the benefit of a free card for those of us at Presidential Platinum. That's what they can't do.

1Ks have gotten a fee reduction or complete waiver (depending on when they got the card) from Chase in the past. Wonder if that regulation CO cites here applies to that as well. In my case that would be a $60/year extra cost.

I have been combing the web, looking for what regulation might prohibit waiving a credit card annual fee.

Certainly, the Credit Cardholders Bill of Rights of 2009, encouraged banks to increase the transparency of the cost of credit, but there was no specific language in the bill pertaining to annual fees, and credit cards without annual fees are not only permitted but remain the norm.

There certainly, ironically, have been numerous cases of banks using this law as a shield to pile on cost, and it could well be this is an example of that, however, I cannot say that for sure.

Equating the new UA/CO with the Soviet is the perfect analogy. Come to think of it... the Soviet was much better at keeping everyone informed. Often announcing 5-year and 10-year plans that always came out exactly as stated.

One may interpret the silence as "holding back back news" or "CO/UA has not yet made a final decision about all the details".

I still give them the benefit of the doubt, and think they will keep E+ on existing planes... might not have made up their mind about CO metal.
The important question IMO is whether newly deliveries will have E+ or not.

Well, there are only two possibilities:

1. They have not made up their mind yet. If this is the case, my question is: What are they waiting for? E+ has been in place for a decade, and its track record is established. If UaCo had made substantial changes to E+ in anticipation of the merger and were waiting for the data, I could understand waiting. But UaCo hasn't changed anything about E+, not the cost of the buy-up, nor the yearly package, etc.

So what could they possibly be waiting for?

2. They have made up their mind. In this case, if they're keeping E+, I think it's fairly likely they would have made a big announcement in order to gain some positive publicity. Now, maybe their holding this "chit" so they can coincide it with a big negative announcement, so as to blunt the impact of the negative.

But otherwise, the only reason for not saying anything is it's going bye-bye and they want to be totally in control before the hammer comes down...

My gut feeling is E+ goes away and is replaced fleetwide by ELR...that would be the classic CO solution.

Agreed. These new program changes really suck. The SWU"s are effectively worthless pieces of e-paper. So you have to buy a very expense coach ticket to redeem them? Did someone at UA/CO mgmt call Doug Parker lately :rolleyes:

CR-1's...can someone explain how these are beneficial when you get upgraded on domestic routes anyway?

Time to look at another airline... :(

IIRC, UA has not obtained new metal since the late 90's (reference airfleets.net). Efficiency could dictate the reduction of aircraft type. Might E+ simply go extinct?

That's probably a little premature, don't you think?

Well, their Airbuses and 777's are new enough to fly for many more years, and only slightly older than CO's average fleet age.

The only truly ancient planes in the UA fleet at the 744's and the 752's, while their 763's are right on the cusp of becoming geezers...