another big "difference" is the argument is specious at best. Imagine a scenario where a 23 year NRSA employee heads for 22c and notices a 2 yr NRSA employee turn left and sit in row 4. He asks the purser whats that all about ? and she sez "oh she paid the $25 buy up"

Certainly if I were to fly an airline where I have no status (rights) -- and there are many -- and I could buy a better leg-room seat for a reasonable amount, I'd do it. After all, that's the primary reason why I spent a not-so-reasonable amount on UA every year :D

UA has Had this program for ages. We travel at different priorities based on our willingness to pay an increased service charge. If we take the cheapest route, all employees, regardless of seniority who are willing to pay the higher service charge, as well as all offline airline employees, and companions trump you. I have never heard any airline employee complain about this system, where cash in ua's coffers gets a higher priority for getting on, getting a better seat, than less cash in ua's pocket.

Your example is good, and it exists in RL, where $ and low seniority trumps less $ and high seniority.

Interesting and good to know. ^ Now when theres a last minute cat fight at the gate I'll know whats going on :D

E+ is not going away... I suspect CO/UA will announce this soon. (In the new world economy E+ is the new business class, business class is the new FC, which means I bet FC is going away.)

Allegedly, the reason UA holds exit rows for 1P and higher isn't so much of a perk reason as a "we don't know if you are capable of meeting the requirements of the exit row" for unknown flyers.

Your 2nd paragraph...what about a Kettle who purchases a ticket far in advance, and has a return the next day, thus paying top dollar as the cheap tickets mostly require minimum stays in markets where LCC pricing hasn't eroded the fare structure. Would he be entitled to that as pricing isn't necessarily based only on advanced purchase, but also on bookings, projected demand and minimum stay, along with the competition of fare sales that come and go from time to time. Maybe Joe mileage runner minimum level elite books 1 week out, has a weekend stay and pays 1/4 of what the Kettle paid, and the kettle paid even more to get that seat. Would you say that the airline shouldn't allow things to be bought on a 1st come 1st serve basis based on paying extra for it? The basic seat/ticket price is irrelevant as status doesn't come into play at all, and advanced purchase isn't always the major determining factor, rather this is an incremental, above the ticket price fee. Most people that buy more than a few months out pay "regular" prices (non sale) while most sales start a few months before dptr as that's when the LCC's launch them, and the demand picture has solidified. For example, WN used to only publish there schedule for less than (2) quarters. If you wanted to buy a ticket somewhere 7 months out, you had to pay legacy non-sale prices. I believe they have increased their schedule, window to 3/4 of a year now, give or take, but it still isn't the 331 days of some carriers, so booking for next Oct, is going to cost you more for most people than booking for Feb, as there aren't the LCC prices to compete with.

I understand what your saying, and I see where you might feel miffed, but come on, the right to sell a product that people are willing to pay for is a primary goal of airlines. They don't give seats to employees over revenue passengers, they don't give upgrades to F when they expect to sell them, and free premium Y seating would be a function of giving it away when they feel they can't sell it for more. An accurate demand for what people are willing to pay is the cornerstone of revenue management and yield systems. It is the airline's fiduciary duty to their shareholders to return a profit, when able to to them. You may (and rightly so, or wrongly so) feel that the mass exodus of flyers over the inability to get something of value for free over those that have tendered payment for it will hurt the bottom line of the airline. Incremental revenue is the big thing. A la carte pricing, charging for services that people are willing to pay for is no longer a thing of the future, but a direction even WN has chosen to offer with their "Business Select" fares. The company that advertises their simplicity also looks to charge for a service/product when there are people willing to pay for it.

Tell us who they are and we'll be sure to ask them...


I agree with Boca, what do we have to lose? Please keep us updated. Thanks for your efforts!

I've been with CO for a very long time (my OP card has the Eastern Airlines logo).. and been elite for much of it.

I just don't feel that my PE status is worse than it was 3-4 years ago. Upgrades are a little harder, but I blame that on there being more elites than ever.

So, could you please list (in order) what you feel are substantial reasons you are upset at CO? What has changed in the last 3 years that you don't like? (ELR before OLCI to me doesn't count because I think its just lining up with UA because E+ is here to stay.)

Why doesn't ELR before OLCI count? UA doesn't currently offer it for sale, and there has been no indication they plan on it. CO is now selling it. That's a big difference (and something worthy of being upset about).

Really? Non-elites cannot buy E+ prior to OLCI?

I do not believe that is accurate.

Uh, UA begs and pleads with non-elites to purchase E+ at anytime up to and including OLCI. A friend of mine bought it after booking an IAD - MUC leg for the extra room to sleep.

You're still speculating - I doubt E+ is sticking around, at least in its present form. Maybe on Int'l aircraft, but gone on domestic. That's my speculation.

I think UA-NYC is referring to exit rows (and maybe bulkheads).

Smisek is not running a european airline. If CO is dreaming of E+ as a separate cabin they won't have to worry about placating UA elites because we will all be gone.

You're narrowing your point down to a specific example - of someone buying a ticket 7+ months out and paying more for their ticket than an Elite buying inside of a week? Sorry, I don't buy that.

Also, you're ignoring the revenue contribution of an Elite over a 12 month period vs the Kettle who might fly once or twice each year and who selects their airline based on price and/or schedule.

The issue of a loyal, frequent customer being shorted on seating because a low-value casual customer is a real one - and a significant one.

An airline looking at each customer and saying "what are you giving me today, now, on this flight" while ignoring their rolling 12 month contribution is an airline just looking to lose its loyalty base. Just ask Delta how well that worked out for them during the Mullin era. Or how US did with their slew of anti-customer initiatives post-9/11.

Sorry to say, but loyalty needs to come first. Yes, there are examples out there of folks at every tier who only fly the cheapest tickets, but they are a minority, as are the folks who only fly full fare or paid F. The majority of Elites are in the middle, flying a mix of fares which add up to a significantly higher average revenue contribution than 99% of the Kettles.

So no - I do not believe a Kettle should be able to buy an ELR seat out from under a later-booking Elite regardless of who paid what fare.