I believe that as long as the miles come from a Plat account all changes and fees will be free for the travelers regardless of status.

Edited to add: looks like Scott already addressed this --

As long as the miles are from a platinum account you will continue to pay zero fees.

Coach and BF to Europe became 5000 miles more expensive on Saverpass.

I do see the overall positive changes for many people. Of course what's good for some isn't good for everyone.

In my case, the changes have little value. In fact, the changes probably result in an overall negative.

The end of the same day change fee is good. I'll take advantage of that on occasion.

Giving full EQM and EQP to everyone doesn't affect me directly. I am allowed to book my own tickets, so I always use co.com anyway. Selfishly, it's probably a negative, as it will allow more people to make platinum and I'll have to compete with the for upgrades and seat 12A.

The minimum elite bonus is nice as well. 90% of my connections go through IAH which is less than 500 miles.

The 1.5 EQP is a bad change for me. I make platinum or points long before miles (although this year was closer). Unless my travel drastically drops off next year, I'll still make it on points. However, there's nothing positive about this change.

The rest of the changes really don't apply to me. (Except the loss of reciprocals on NW, but everyone knew that was coming.)

What it all boils down to in my opinion, is that with these changes as well as DEQM promos, that I don't see much benefit. However, there will just be more people to compete with the few perks I do see.

I see one glitch in the award chart -- Russia is defined as "Europe". With the loss of Aeroflot, most of the eastern Russia destinations are gone.
However, Asiana flies to Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk (UUS) and Khabarovsk (KHV), and Air China to Chita (HTA). These would probably be classified as northern Asia.

I think these changes really make the Onepass program much more attractive. Great job CO and CO Insider!

On another note, since we are all getting new elite cards, do you think they would use this as an opportunity to redesign them? I mean, I don't know if anyone agrees with me on this, but I think the cards are completely ugly!

Overall, net positives, even though a few of the changes don't affect me that much - minimum miles on flights, for instance. Sad about the loss of Amtrak, US helicopter (though I've yet to try it and now have an incentive), and Emirates earning. Hope the EK redemptions will stay for that trip to the Maldives I keep in my wish list. (BTW, if it's redemption only on EK from now on, what about adding a FC option, as with some of the new partners?)

I think the true test will be the upcoming earning rules, upgrade policies and reward charts with our new partner airlines.

Just a thought for CO Insider: if one has already qualified for Plat for next year, why not send out the new card with an expiration date of 02/11 and save yourselves a mailing, or printing out cards again in a few months. I realize there may be some new alliance info that you'd want to put out when next year's cards would normally arrive, but you could save the card printing, at least.

Just wanted to add - with the changes to the minimum miles earned and the 100% miles regardless of how booked, CO has only reinforced us, again, to keep the complaints going. Scott even wrote at the end of #4, "Message received". So, for all those folks who gripe about the complaints people sometimes write about CO policies, you've just seen that it can be successful, even if it's really not due to our complaints as opposed to outside forces. Pavlovian reinforcement yet again.

Thanks, Insider, for the communication and the forthrightness.

If Emirates has to go, I vote to replace them with Eithad. Fantastic business product

Vote all you want, but it will likely be Qatar when it happens as they are positioning themselves to join *A.

And their J product isn't bad either, plus they have IAH-DOH service

^
BD and UA already have mileage agreements with QR, im not sure who else.

That's fine with me.

Thanks! I too hope that we move to T1, as I'd really like to use the lounge there. T3 sucks for decent lounges. If I fly AC at least I can use the lounge then (here's hoping earning on miles on AC is decent).

As a CO Gold you'll be Star Alliance Gold. That gets you free access to any *A Gold lounge when departing on any *A carrier. You can use the AC/SK "London Lounge" if flying CO out of T3. If SQ is still in T3 (don't recall) you can also use their smaller but very nice lounge as well. If CO moves to T1, which I'm sure will happen sooner or later, then the shared *A Lounge and the separate BD lounge are available.

The only time you can't use a *A lounge based on your CO G *G status is if you're using a USA-based UA, US, or I expect also CO lounge on a purely domestic itinerary. Since UA, US, and CO sell lounge memberships, and have some many North American-based elites, their lounges don't admit on pure-domestic itineraries. US Clubs define Canada and Mexico as still "domestic" for purposes of denying access. But UA lounges do admit USA-based-program *G members on Canadian and Mexican itins as "international". Also as a *G, if you physically have airside access to where there's a SQ, AC, LH, or other non-UA/US/CO lounge, you can access on any *A itinerary, not just an international itin. For example, the new LH lounge in IAD Terminal B - any UA 1P/1K, any US GE/PE/CP, and as of 10/27, any CO Gold/Plat, will have access when flying any *A itin out of IAD. If you have your card - LH Lounge Dragons are merciless about having a valid current-year card with a Star Gold logo on it.

This is not entirely correct.

For US lounges, they do not deny *G on Mexico/Canada itins. They only deny their own (US members) on Mexico/Canada itins. *A prohibits them from denying other *G members on int'l itineraries.

I have successfully entered US lounges on a US ticket to/from Mexico and a UA*G card. Some agents question it, but if they refer to their documentation, it's quite clear. A US member is to be denied, but a UA (and presumably CO in the future) member is not.