I find it interesting that you didn't quote the portion of my post where I conceded exactly that (my CLE-DTW example).

Looks like it's been too long a work day. Of course you are right. I hate it when I'm making a mistake.

I flash back to the Q&A with Dougie Parker at the DO - he played dumb when US FFers tried to tell him that they weren't getting enough Preferred (aka elite zone) seats held, and were instead having to fork over $5-10 for the Choice seats (same elite zone, just not free for elites).

In response to the crowd saying that US was the only program to charge its elites for better Y seats, he basically said "it's only a matter of time before the other majors start doing the same thing".

While Newnited hasn't quite stooped to this level yet, I can now see the day where $misekCo says "you know what, those ELR seats are purdy good - almost like a poor man's F, I think Elites should have to pay at least a little to reserve them".

Based on the "enhancements" (and lack of any response to our concern), this won't shock me now.

Not particularly interesting, really. I was simply suggesting the example you were using in an effort to discredit my previous statement wasn't very useful at all for that purpose.

The fact that there are a LOT more flights where elites don't make up 50% of the passengers is a useful data point and shouldn't be mentioned only as an afterthought.

SBM.

Sometimes I wonder why you can't see in the same greytones that I deal with regularly...my goal was never to claim that kettles and elites are a 50/50 split on all CO flights systemwide.

My point was to demonstrate that when you balance the route I mentioned (because I flew it the other day) and counterbalance that with lots of CLE-DTWs, that I still believe that elites are not as outnumbered as you might think they are.

We can discuss what the numbers are but I don't think of elites as a tiny sub-segment of the traveling public on CO.

Please don't make my position in posts seem extreme when it is clearly not.

UA already sells a product that does some of this, Premier Travel.

Welcome to unbundling.

yes, but it doesn't put non-elites ahead of elites, just in the mix with them; its highly unlikely unless the plane is 75%+ elite that they'll run out of space.

How about calling it CO-opting a United Presence or COUP for short.

Gimme a break, I came up with this in a few minutes of reading #1. It's a viable start. ;)

It wouldn't shock me, but it might influence (reduce) the amount of travel UA/CO will get from me significantly. Most of my travel is discretionary and virtually all self-funded (and free of MRs/VRs). So if it becomes too much of a painful experience, I'll find a different use for those dollars. I will, of course, still travel to visit family, but maybe not as often. I will still go on vacation, but probably not as often or far if it means traveling in E-. And I will start considering other carriers.

Not saying that charging elites for ELR-style seats is the straw that breaks the camel's back, but surely it's getting there eventually.

Agree. This thinking can be extended to consulting travel as well when one is doing the weekly back and forth travel. It may become very difficult to justify the extra flight comfort expenses (e.g. if CO/UA charges for ELR) expenses to a client.

Just my two cents..

True, but it's possible. There's also the possibility that a Kettle buying E+ for a trip months in advance could ace an elite who is buying a last-minute ticket.

The bottom line is UA started the process of "selling" elite perks well before the CO merger.

I hear what you are saying, but that they aren't free is a poor argument (maybe not yours, but the one you mention.) In all the programs I am aware of, they are space available, at no charge. There is no entitlement to the seat, no guarantee, no transaction of XXX future purchases or XXX previous purchases gets me the seat, rather if bought, a transaction occurs that effectively sells the seat for a specific price. If not bought, they are given away at no additional charge, no promise of future revenue required, and nothing given if not available. They are an intrinsic perk that one may get or may not get for the small price of nothing on a transactional level.

I understand the perk of previous flying. But it is not a sale, it is not a guarantee, and there is nothing given to you in in't place when it is not available. It is "spoilage", much like the NRSA seat I sit in. They sell it if they can, when they can, and if they can't then people with certain qualifications (elites/employees) get it on a space available basis.

I know I will sound like the evil beast for this comment, but I have had dinner recently with a UA IM manager. I told her that on many flights, NF is sold out in advance, to the point there are zero remaining F seats to clear at the gate or to even sell. I often have 2P's that cleared at their window sitting in F on uber-cheap tickets, and 1K/GS who bought tickets that day for multiples of the 2P's ticket fare, sitting in Y. To me, it makes sense to hold at least a pair of seats for sale up until the ticket purchase cutoff/checkin cutoff. Reallocate those seats via the DM list to whoever is highest on the UGDG list, and give the opportunity for them to sell. Her response: We do it so you don't get overworked as a GA. (I think she was serious too!) Please! If I have to assign out 20 E+ seats to non elites on the BP1/2 list each flight as E- is oversold and E+ is empty, do you think I can't call 2 people up for an upgrade? Anyway, that is my stance, try to sell the product for as long as you can, and liquidate the spoilage at the end to whoever, be it elites or NRSA. I know people would want to have their UG's clear earlier and know where they will be, and if they cleared (maybe so they can buy a lunch if in Y...) and a move to not process so many UG's in advance would upset a few, but a sold out cabin is real revenue lost. I don't think that it would be that far of a stretch for CO's few ELR seats to be allocated the same way, if not bought by 30 min or an hour prior to dptr, then let them go into the elite pool.

Cash is king, loyalty can be fickle, and loyalty doesn't promise future revenue, only past, as all of the threads of all the "loyal" UA flyers begging for a top tier match to AA shows.

And ep coward, as you say, "The bottom line is UA started the process of "selling" elite perks well before the CO merger." To be sure, UA started selling the best seats to anyone who paid long before there was such a thing as an upgrade or even a loyalty program. It was called a first class ticket, and traditionally, one bought it and got it, or sat in coach, unless you were an employee, who previous to the invention of upgrades, got ALL of the spoilage. Things change, sometimes for the consumers benefit, some times for the stockholder's benefit, but things do change.

I don't disagree with that. But there is a certain contractual understanding between UA/CO and its employees that the employee status will come with "free" premium class travel, if space is available (unused for customers). If UA/CO then turns around and ensures that there is a significantly reduced chance that there will be space available, it may not be a breach of the formal labor contract, but it shouldn't be shocking to anyone if the employees (a) don't like it and (b) look at renegotiating the deal.

Oh wait, we're not talking about employees here... let's rewrite that:

I don't disagree with that. But there is a certain understanding between UA/CO and elite flyers that the elite status will come with "free" upgrades, if space is available (unsold for cash). If UA/CO then turns around and ensures that there is a significantly reduced chance that there will be space available, it may not be a breach of the T&Cs, but it shouldn't be shocking to anyone if the elites (a) don't like it and (b) look at renegotiating the deal.

In the case of elites, the renegotiating is somewhat different, though. We can try and express our opinion and hope that UA/CO listens and maybe reconsiders. If not, we can either accept it or "strike" by moving part or all of our business elsewhere. In the case of employees... well, you know what your options are (airline employees often enough get told here to find a different job if they don't like their current one)

Don't disagree with that and don't think you're evil but my personal experience as a 1K is that I don't always clear at the window. Last weekend I cleared at the airport on a 757 from SFO to LAX. A SWU upgrade IAD-FRA flight next weekend finally cleared today, after being waitlisted for six months (and seat map was virtually empty in C). But you certainly have a better data set to work with here.

Ability to get a good economy seat even if the upgrade doesn't clear is a key elite benefit for me that keeps me (so far) loyal with UA/CO. Take away that near certainty and you remove a significant reason for me to be loyal.

Disagree. The benefits I get as a UA elite (E+, upgrades, ...) are a key reason to remain loyal with UA. I've said it many times here when people ask if they should switch to another airline after securing status with the first one: why "work" towards status and then not use it? I think there is a very strong correlation between loyalty and future revenue.... unless the program messes with the reasons for remaining loyal. The "AA deserters" simply feel that UA has messed to much with their program. Not everyone agrees with them, of course. Personally, I'd rather lose all CR1s than E+ and/or the high likelihood of getting exit row seats. Others will disagree with that.

Actually this is not true. Loyalty and past revenue is a fairly good projection marker for future revenue, assuming the terms of the game don't change. The more stable the program and the product, or the more *real* enhancements offered, the more accurate the projection marker.

Why do you think the UA people are fleeing for AA? Because they are 'fickle'? That's nonsense - only the 'organizer' of that movement is fickle (someone who has jumped across every Elite program in this country over the past few years without finding happiness), but he is taking a number of long-standing loyal customers along. Others are looking at Delta as an alternative.

Why? Because the terms of the game are changing. Based on the changes we've seen so far, we're not holding our breath for actual improvements, but net reductions to Elite benefits, and something tells me an act of borderline slaughter is around the corner, program-wise.

I've been a CO Plat and evangelist for 10 years - I hardly think that makes me fickle. Plenty of other folks here have been around a lot longer than that. That's what loyalty means - and that's why courting and keeping loyal customers is the hallmark of any product or service business no matter the industry.

Wow...just wow.

Everything you say is true. You're not telling us anything we don't already know. But there is a big difference between not guaranteeing an F seat to an elite and trying everything an airline can to sell them as cheaply as necessary while simultaneously no longer or rarely assigning the same seats to those who have already shown loyalty to the program that year or the year before. It's a high wire act that CO has been failing epically with as of late, and UA, if it'as run like CO, will fail equally epically.

To say this differently....I have no problem if UA or CO can sell seats in F for F fares (whether in one transaction at booking or multiple transactions as in buy-ups during or before OLCI). What's left over is left over for elites and employees.

I do have a problem with CO or UA selling the seats for pennies on the dollar to generate marginal incremental revenue which virtually guarantees selling out F, while also guaranteeing that "free complimentary upgrades" are effectively happening rarely. And if elites who are no longer getting upgrades for their loyalty take their entire business somewhere else, then long-term incremental revenue will be less than the revenue lost by those elites moving their business.

I am surprised UA isn't already doing that. I don't have any experience on UA, but on AA it's very rare for F to be completely full on the day or departure. It seems there are always a couple of seats available in F for purchase even on DOD.

That said, you have certainly adopted Smisek's school of thought. Those two seats you keep referring to that are real lost revenue...isn't it real lost revenue when a 1k who no longer clears his/her upgrades bolts to AA or DL? Or does that not count because you can't quantify it a easily?

Non-sense. Loyalty isn't a fickle a you seem to think. And loyalty isn't defined as sticking with an airline when it has you bend over the barrel. Loyalty is to choose to fly on UA when you had a chance to fly on aa or DL when their price was cheaper. Or steering your family's flying UA's way when other options might have been cheaper or more convenient. And I guarantee that if you're 1k, GS, CO Plat or PPLat, you will have paid more for tickets to fly on UA or CO, you will have flown less convenient schedules than you could have, and you will have influenced others to do the same. Again, that is real loyalty that pads UA's bottomline, but it doesn't mean that when UA bends us over the barrel, that we have to take it.

And while we are on the subject...the UA folks that are trying to match to AA (which they will not succeed with btw) are not trying to leave UA because they are fickle. They are doing what many of us have been doing for some time...running away from the Smisek train that is coming at them full-steam. If you don't think further program devaluations are on their way, I have a wonderful ocean front property in Arizona to sell you. WHat w have seen so far is only the opening salvo. Smisek's un-bundling strategy is diametrically opposed to the interests of elites and SMisek will do what it takes to get incremental revenue, even if it hoses his most frequent flyers. Take a look at what is going on with the PPLat tier. So as far as I am concerned, the UA folks trying to move are merely the guys that are a little more proactive.

You sure sound pretty bitter and your attitude towards elites seems pretty biased in a negative way. Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but allow me to point out a few obvious things. Even a normal 1k might spend $10k or more a year in flying. I personally spent somewhere between $15k and $20k with CO in 2008. As of 2011, all that money is gone and with AA now. $15k - $20k is real money. It's a significant percentage of the take-home pay of a GA or FA. So if enough of us bolt for whatever reason, the new UA will have to replace our revenue with something else to keep your jobs. Now, if I have family and I influence them similarly, the effect is more severe. And if I am a big-wig at a corporation and I take my firm's flying away from the new UA, we might be talking about eliminating many jobs unless Smisek can sell more of what used to be free.

I encourage you not to think of us as lice, but as the guys/gals who give you and your peers the opportunity to work in this business. Now, if you hate the business, then I can't help you but to say that you should probably take your skills and try to apply them out there somewhere else in the economy. But let me warn you about that...like many of us elites have found out the hard way, with the opportunity to hit the big time, comes the stress of not being protected by unions and contracts. When it's just your skills, smarts, and effort that keep you gainfully employed, life can be very brutal.