This isn't one of them. A change in revenue would change it, sure. However, when you read the general feelings on this board, it is
1) THANK GOD
2) "It won't affect me, and I don't care"
3) I won't make it because I made platinum with a 3K (whatever) spend, and DL should be thankful I'm filling their seats.

Revenue drop will change things.

"I am unwilling or unable to make a pre-determined contribution ((that is fair, and probably well-below what should qualify as "elite")) and it's just not fair because I have been Diamond for two years" won't cut it.

DL did the research on this. Employee groups have been notified of a lot of it. It is solid.

Fly other carriers...I think that is the message that DL is sending you. They would rather have you on occasion as a Kettle than regularly siphoning benefits from those that are more-deserving.

I predict the other legacy carriers will match to stay competitive
 

I expect a change in the character of the "mileage run deals" forum. People will be alerting us to high cpm fares to qualify for next year's status.

I may add "w a n k e r " as I laugh loudly on the next 10 flights I scheduled for the next 7 weeks before this happened ...

Remember, loyalty is a two way street.

Oh wait, never-mind.

Finding high cpm fares isn't exactly hard ...

[QUOTE=ElmhurstNick;20074539]The very simple stand is:

1) Sit down every fall and re-evaluate your priorities and how FFPs (and their hotel versions) fit into your priorities
2) Plan out your approach to the year accordingly and determine how much and on who you plan to travel
3) Re-adjust when major news or program changes break.

yup!

You infer

The message implies

Seems to be that Delta might actually be encouraging the F fare mileage run now... Wonder what the impact might be on those who want upgrades...

I'm surprised how comparatively little has been made of the drastic devaluation of the program through the annihilation of earning on Skyteam partners.

I fly paid J/F on partners quite a bit (if I'm going to spend $5-10k on an airplane ticket, it's not going to be for DL's level of service), while traveling domestically almost exclusively in paid Delta F.

75% earnings for discounted biz and 100% for full fare J is insulting, to say the least, and will only result in an acceleration of the shift I was already starting to make toward United MP (whose miles are infinitely more valuable than DL's anyhow).

I've been some level of elite on DL every year since 2004 (when I was 22 years old). I travel for enjoyment and pay for it out of my own pocket. I also realize that, in the grand scheme of things, I am a very small fish in a big pond and Delta doesn't really care one way or the other if they run me off.

But, in my eyes, I'm the kind of customer an airline should want: happy to pay the premium to ride up front, doesn't take advantage of hardly any elite benefits, and dutifully uses the DL AMEX for most everything. I've stuck by DL through devaluation after devaluation of the Skymiles program, and it's sad that this one change will mean the end of that relationship, more based on principle than anything else.

They need to devise that dashboard fix NOW, not a year from now.

Who has time to unpack all YTD purchases to project hitting MQD thresholds?

Having had a couple of days to digest this (and read through this monster of a thread), I am still not clear on how to call it.

Most people who are defending this move here, are doing so from the angle of DL doing what's right for the business, which is bring revenue. Ensuring that people are spending a certain amount per year with DL directly helps accomplish this, as does the AMEX co-brand factor.

Where I see this potentially becoming problematic for DL is potentially unable to project people's travel habits, once they're not tied to DL.

Despite what the HRCs may think of themselves, they're not paying for the plane to get off the ground. As another airline's exec told me, they need back-of-the-bus pax to pay for the plane's flight. Having people tied up in a loyalty program that promises lower-tier status helps achieve this.

These pax represent the volume game for DL. And because DL has so very few USPs to offer in terms of hard product, compared to other carriers (it's a level field, really), soft products like loyalty programs become important.

So, as a GM who may or may not spend $5k a year with DL, I am married to DL based on the fact that I can get 50% off Econ Comfort, lounge access on international itins, free extra bags and domestic upgrades. So that means that I can rationalize spending $50-200 more with DL on a flight, as opposed to flying with AA or UA, because I get something in return.

So, DL doesn't have to be ultra-competitive on fares in order for me to stick with them.

(Yes, sometimes I may take advantage of an MR, but assume that most people out there aren't that crazy and just get by on regular flying)

So, if I calculate that there really isn't a practical reason for me to spend $5k with DL in 2014, as I can do all the flying I need to do for $3.5k, I take my business elsewhere. So, whereas before DL had me by the balls due only to their loyalty program, and I was fine with paying $1,200 to fly LHR-CVG-LHR, when AA/BA were willing to get me there for $950, now that's not the case.

And because the lower level elites represent a higher overall volume of passengers, I would think it's harder to hedge against the purchasing behavior of those pax, as they're not a "safe bet" to book with DL anymore. I am sure the MBAs at DL thought this through and have modeled an attrition rate among this group, but I'd be curious to see where they net out in terms of predictions and reality.

We know that DL used it's loyalty program to differentiate itself aggressively since coming out of Ch.11. Rollovers, miles that don't expire - it's an easy way to get people to switch, when other carriers aren't offering this.

With this instrument, effectively, rejiggered in a way that benefits a smaller % of folks (and FT audience, esp. the corporate traveler, aren't a good representation of the overall pool, I don't think), another carrier may have its Sprint moment.

By that, I mean that I assume DL will be followed by another major legacy. My guess is UA, who is doing something similar with the new segment rule. This would be akin to AT&T and VZW going from truly unlimited data to introducing caps and giving Sprint the opportunity to seize a portion of the market, who otherwise would have never considered it, with a truly unlimited option at competitive rates.

Now, say what you want about Sprint's financial performance, but they've harnessed an opportunity. I could see someone like American stepping into the void and being the last remaining legacy in the US to not play the MQD game, ostensibly capturing a % of former DL GMs and FOs who are affected by DL's changes. And if we are to assume that these folks are net-positive for an airline, from a revenue standpoint, there are gains to be had.

I realize my thinking might be flawed and I don't need someone to get on a high horse and scoff at it.

What I think would have been a better move for DL is to differentiate between the bottom 2 tiers and the top 2 tiers in its FFP. Right now, GM benefits are actually fairly competitive with Plat. There is less of a difference between GM, Plat and DM than between FO and GM. And on international travel, on partner carriers, these three are treated the same. Introducing a revenue component on Plat and DM to narrow those ranks, and taking away/reducing UG privileges from GM and FO (or maybe just FO?) could still provide enough of an incentive for the masses to stick with DL due to the other benefits of the loyalty scheme (2x RDM earn as GM, free bags, reduced rate on EC seats), while addressing the problem of having 14 DMs not clearing an UG on a JFK-LAX flight.

Thoughts?

At least after this year.

A fair response. I fully understand Delta's reasoning behind it. There are too many elites(mostly from the CC and easy MQM from that). They want to "thin the herd." Revenue is a true measure of value to Delta. I get all of that and agree with the reasoning. However, while I understand their thinking, I think their execution leaves much to be desired.

I think Delta would be far better served by simply raising the mileage requirements. Doing so would reduce elites, achieve the higher spend they desire and offset the inflation of the CC holders. And not offend loyal flyers (such as myself) or completely devalue rollover miles.

Or they could have used far more realistic MQD requirements. Unless someone is exclusively buying full fare economy or maybe FC/BC ticket(highly unlikely for most people), you will almost always have far more MQM than MQD from a given ticket. And even then, the bonus miles from such tickets will skew the ratio. Buying typical posted discount fares, with no extreme fare sales, I find it difficult to see spending more than 1500-2000 per 25k MQM, especially on longer haul flights. And especially considering tax and fees are not counted as MQD. Obviously, one can spend far less if they were doing mileage runs.

As I posted elsewhere, I'm set on status probably through 2014. But based on these changes I will be looking closely at other FF programs. Sad, because I generally give great preference to Delta. I have not flown on anything but Delta (or a partner) in the past several years. They had and have 100% of my business. Because of these changes, at some point they might have 0%.

Like the research on rollovers and alliance earning on elite tier bloating was solid?

They don't deserve all this puppy love. They're entering the minimum-spend requirement game deep into the late innings. To ensure that those who earn elite status have paid to do so is a do-over, not an innovation.

Given that government taxes and fees are a hefty component of the price paid for a ticket, the MQD model will become an unfathomable stringency to the average flyer.

How does this affect lifetime medallion status given to Million Milers. Do they have to meet the spend requirement to keep silver or gold earned as MM? What about gifting status as a choice benefit?