milesmuncher

The scene has been going downhill, fast, for the past 11 years? That's quite a long time for something to be declining rapidly!

But in all seriousness, I can't see how "award consulting services" caused LX/LH/SQ and others to essentially block certain types of bookings. Do you really think that LX/LH F would be available more than 14 days out if these services didn't exist? Feels like that trend is a much bigger driver of decreased availability than the impact of these services.

lwildernorva

Somewhere, I'm hearing a blacksmith complaining about how things have changed for the worse since the advent of those "horseless carriages."

benzemalyonnais

It is only a matter of time before CC bonuses die, but that will come after bloggers lose their affiliate kickbacks.

Just like CVS will die because of bloggers and exposure. Like anything good out there nowadays - if it's THAT valuable to you, its not going on FT.

Bloggers can't be referred to as 'king' but rather as ones who seek profit. They get that theill of being deemed an 'expert' and that's worth posting things all over their blogs that kill deals.

This is why I love fuel dumping. I don't really need to manufacture spend if I can go to Asia at 1.5cpm, do I? And, no one posts it all over the place so its still alive.

FT has such a wide audience now because for some reason it's too easy to get CCs. My 18Yo brother has 4 now and a 700 score

lkar

Good response, Astrophysx. Thanks for posting.

I think the issue comes up because your OP was a bit of an insinuation. I don't know if that's how you intended it, but it's how it read to me at least. Its main components were: (1) His ability to do what he's doing doesn't seem to add up to me without outside support. (2) His reviews are getting soft. (3) These things raise a substantial question to me whether he is failing to disclose getting paid by airlines.

To me -- and it doesn't have so much to do with the fact that lucky is a FT member -- one cannot be cavalier about this kind of insinuation in a public forum and has a bit of a duty before making it to either investigate the subject more or contact the target.

To be very clear, I think generally questioning whether bloggers are getting undisclosed kickbacks is completely fair game. Similarly, I think it is entirely fair to talk about the quality or other aspects of a blogger's product. I myself have some issues with Lucky's reviews lately and I think that's all legitimate. I think where this particular subject veered a bit was that it was personal and read more accusatory than inquiry. So, I do think it was fair game for Lucky to respond as he did. And his blog to me seems like the right place to do it. If you're asking the question, I think he is right to think maybe others are doing the same, and posting on his blog will answer the questions for all his readers, not just the ones who look at milesbuzz on FT. Some of the sycophantic lucky love expressed in various places in response to the questions you raised is over the top. But, to the extent you are genuinely wondering about a reasoned response to your post and the reaction, that's my $.02.

I think you also had the problem that, in terms of the bloggers to pick, lucky is sort of the last one many would associate with unethical behavior. If you follow his blog, the guy seems pretty balanced. (1) He walks a tighter line about blowing deals than many of his counterparts, though clearly not as tight as many would prefer. (2) He doesn't hawk his referral links except in a fairly low key way. (3) Even though he has a booking business, if you give him the chance, he will basically give you trade secrets for free. I contacted him once with some questions and told him I would like to use his services, and he essentially told me what to do myself. He does the same thing on a daily basis in his "ask lucky" segment, and has made it very clear that losing a $200 sale for his booking business is not something he cares about if he can be helpful to someone trying to learn the ropes. My experience with the guy is that he's a pretty genuine straight shooter.

AlohaDaveKennedy

It is just not like the good old days when I was a kid and had to walk to the mailbox through the snow uphill both ways to send off my credit card application. Back then cards really left an impression and carbon paper was king. Now anyone can get credit, from bankrupt countries that can't even produce a budget, to college grads who can't even find a job.

Adam1222

i think there is also a difference between questioning whether someone is being paid to fly (although, the correct question is how does someone fly all the time AND pay rent since they can't be working), and question whether they are being rewarded in softer ways. Two bloggers are extremely positive about American Airlines these days, constantly tweeting/blogging about how AMAZING it is, and tweeting with the AA Twitter folks. Neither criticized the ugly livery. Neither questioned the wisdom of a bankrupt company doing that. Neither have objectively noted that the equipment enhancements are so far down the road to be useless. Both are relatively recent converts to American flyers.

kokonutz

Don't be coy. Name names!

Adam1222

Not hard to figure out, but TPG and Lucky. Their sites have lost all critical commentary of AA.

CalGuy

What does "freedom of speech" have to do with anything? You do realize that "freedom of speech" only pertains to Congress making laws that abridge that freedom, right? You might as well have started your comment with your feeling that it's very important that we don't have to quarter troops in our homes in peacetime without the consent of the owner (third amendment).

lkar

That's funny. But your analogy isn't really apt.

There are way too many invocations on message boards of the first amendment. And, yes, the bottom line is that message boards have rules, they aren't the government, and if the sense of the community and those who host the board is that certain topics are in and certain are out, that's their right.

But there is a larger point about "freedom of speech" on the internet in general and message boards in particular. It's in the constitution in part because it's a good idea and ideal. So, when people talk about "freedom of speech" or the "first amendment" when discussing message board topics, although they are conflating private and public conduct and sound a bit silly to civics teachers and lawyers, I think it's also constructive to actually engage the point they think they are making which is not a frivolous one notwithstanding the error in both terminology and understanding.

So, while no one has a right to post whatever they like on a non-governmental message board, there's a larger discussion than just about rights. What should we want our community to be? For example, I am not interested in any messageboard that has non-viewpoint neutral rules. A message board that says, "no politics" is fine with me. A messageboard that says, "you can talk about politics here, unless your message is critical of X party" is not one I think particularly valuable. Similarly, a rule like "no comments about moderators or moderation" is quite different from a rule that says, "no negative comments about moderators."

To go back on topic, I read astro as saying little more than that with respect to this particular subject, more discussion not less is good. Given that some in the thread (me included!) are suggesting that this is a topic that was wrongfully broached or that shouldn't be broached until x, y or z happens (e.g., contacting lucky), I think this is an entirely appropriate response by astro. While he may have terminology off, and may not be a lawyer, maybe he really is a physicist and would probably get a chuckle out of you or me trying to explain quantum mechanics.

lkar

What are you thinking the soft benefits are? Seems really unlikely to me. I mean, I think lucky gets better treatment when he tweets a concern to AA than you or I would -- because they know he can skewer them in a space that lots of people read. But, if you've read the blog, the few times he's resorted to social media to resolve an issue, he's been pretty upfront speculating that he got special treatment.

I can accept that I'm being oversensitive on the issue, but I really think that these insinuations against lucky are pretty serious -- you're doing nothing less than speculating about the core value of what they do for a living when you claim that they are not being objective. Maybe they aren't. I will accept that it's possible and I agree that it's worth discussion. For my preference though, it really needs to be something more than, "he hasn't griped about the livery" so he must be getting benefits before I would feel comfortable going live with my assertion. Maybe he actually likes the livery. Maybe he thinks (like me) that what's on the outside of the plane is irrelevant. Maybe he hates the livery but does not particularly view that as a subject worthy of his blog. All of these seem worth considering before jumping to the conclusion that he's not being objective.

I would add, for whatever it's worth, that lucky's blog speaks volumes for how he views AA. He flies them domestically for status and likes the product, but when's the last time you saw a significant trip report with an international segment on AA? He dumps on the US carrier's domestic product continuously, which is not really something you'd do if you were in their pocket.

yerffej201

Um... because you said that lucky gets cheques from clients after paying yq and taxes for them.

In any case, even with credit card churning, once you run out of cards, then what happens? Say you go through two chase cards every year (if not more), so then you have 3 years (or less) to go through chase sp visa, mastercard, freedom, inkbold, and ink plus, ua cards, previous co cards, etc.. So you have around 4-5 years to go through all those cards. So roughly, lucky should be done with those cards. How else does he get ua miles (given he's aa exp plat)?

Strange though how gary leff says he has a 7 figure AA balance but then nobody asks him where he gets them.

kokonutz

Interesting perspective. I did notice that many bloggers, including those two and also Gary went to AA after Smisek screwed up UNITED. I sort of assumed their fawning over AA was to 'punish' Smisek for driving them away with his Houston ways. Also bear in mind that to the extent that the bloggers are also MegaDoers, they tend to love whoever is giving them the most love at the moment...

84fiero

I don't doubt that the MegaDo's are a factor for some (but not all) folks.

Also, sometimes a company decides they're better off "firing" a particular customer and so the customer is forced to make a switch to another provider.

Adam1222

I am entitled to my speculation about the objectivity of a blogger. It's a blog -- a writing for public dissemination and absorption. If you are suggesting that this is a challenge to their journalistic integrity, I guess I agree. Except there is nothing close to the standard of journalistic integrity in play on this or any blogs. Their hanging out with Chase reps would make that painfully obvious.

And blogging isn't really what they "do for a living". Blogging itself does not pay money. Selling stuff does.
If you were a blogger purporting to objectively cover the travel industry, you would admit that lots of people think the livery is ugly/stupid/a waste of money, that AA is bankrupt and the unions and creditors all want leadership out, instead of saying: "With its new livery, new premium 777 planes, Choice Fares and the Business ExtrAA enrollment bonus, American Airlines has been on a roll lately with big news."

That's an advertisement. Not an objective commentary. And entitles a reader to "speculate" about their "core values".

And I think your presumption that the UA/CO merger has anything to do with this has no basis in fact.