Forgive me if one of you here was the creator of the earning miles idea, but at risk of being overly blunt, I think it's ridiculous.

One flies miles. But earning miles? Huh? Let me list the ways this doesn't make sense:

1. It's just awkward to have the same word refer to distinctly different things. "I flew 12,500 miles round trip to/from Europe, but I earned 25,000 miles because I get double RDM due to my 1K status (which is actually from flying not 1,000 miles, but 100,000 miles, er, 80,000 miles with bonuses). Now I can redeem those 25,000 miles for a 5,000 mile roundtrip next month." Anyone outside the travel-geek set would just find this nuts, IMHO.
2. As suggested in previous item, miles flown rarely equal miles earned. Bonuses, limitations, etc.
3. But wait, it sometimes gets even more confusing! Sometimes UA runs a special that lets you fly under, what is it, 1,500 miles for 20,000 miles? "So, honey, I just flew 10,000 miles but got 20,000 miles and I'm going to save 5,000 miles on a special promotion by booking an award for less than 1,500 miles..." aaaaagh!

So my two suggestions are these:

1. Why don't the airlines rename "miles," "points." Then you won't get the sort of confusion I've seen from non-frequent travelers, who assume banking "5,000 miles" means they can fly 5,000 miles for free. (okay, I know that is too good to be true, but really... why would you call them miles if you can't redeem them directly for, well, miles?) Additionally, it'd make a lot more sense outside the flying context. I bought $250 in groceries, I got... miles? No, points. I stayed in a hotel for a few nights, I got miles? (what, I jogged around the hotel?) No, points!
2. Simplify points!: (all one-way)
   - 100 point for short trips (e.g., SFO-LAX)
   - 300 points for medium-length trips (e.g., SFO-JFK)
   - 500 points for long hauls (e.g., SFO-AKL)
   - 100 bonus point for full-fare, business, or FC bookings.
   
   Want to redeem? (one way)
   - 1000 points for short trips
   - 3000 points for medium-length trips
   - 5000 points for long hauls
   Double for business (e.g., 2000 to fly a short haul in C)
   Triple for FC.

* * *

What do you think?
1) Would this be good for frequent travelers?
2) Savvy travelers?
3) Leisure, occasional travelers?
4) Business travelers?

I know, I know, there are also tons of issues about reciprocity, alliances, how to transition, etc. And for these reasons, I don't think it'd ever happen. But I think my proposal is a nice compromise between the very basic but not-very-flexible Southwest version (1 credit whether you fly from SFO to LA or NYC) and the complex/also inflexible UA/typical system (same "miles" needed to go SFO-DEN and SFO-JFK?!)

Another alternative which'd be simpler in a different way:
For every 100 miles you fly, you get to fly 10 miles (literally) for free. e.g., fly 25,000 miles, fly to any destination of 2,500 for free (or fly two trips of 1,250 miles, etc.). Hmm Then, at least, miles are somewhat sort of miles, eh?

Anyone who finds "miles" earning and miles redemption THAT confusing should not leave the house unsupervised..... Anyone who thinks it's "one for one".. (fly 5000, get a 5000 mile award) needs to talk to me.. I have SEVERAL bridges for sale...

You earn "miles" by flying miles... or by spending $X per mile etc So what if "miles" earned does not equate directly to BIS miles travelled?

Changing it to "points" makes no significant difference.. it is just a label... My program doesn't credit miles.. and it makes no real difference.... you "earn" X amount of "whatevers".. and it takes Y amount to redeem a reward....

Not as if "miles" has a single meaning anyway! To YOU it may represent 5280 feet... but not to me.. I come from a metric country... my exposure to "miles" was in the Navy.. and they were "nautical miles" of 6000 feet (2000 yards)..

Can we earn in Statute miles.. and redeem based on Nautical please????

(Yes, my tongue IS planted firmly in my cheek OK??)

No matter what you call 'em, some people will always be confused.

Calling them miles makes sense, as the number of miles credited, while not always equal to the number of miles traveled, is generally in some clear relationship to the number of miles traveled.

Plenty of programs (i.e., European mostly I think) call them points. Some programs have a convoluted scheme as suggested by the OP (IB and JK both come to mind). This is no more or less confusing, and only serves to create problems for people trying to redeem rewards with miles.

Changing the term "miles" to "points" would eliminate some types of confusion, but introduce others because several airline programs already use the term miles and the term points for different purposes. British Airways and Virgin Atlantic award miles for distance flown and partner patronage, but they award tier points to track elite status. Miles are redeemable, tier points are not.

This is somewhat easier to grasp than the typical USA based airline program which distinquishes between "redeemable miles" and "elite qualifying miles". American Airlines tracks elite status simultaneously on three systems: elite qualifying miles, segments flown, and points which reward higher fare classes.

Could programs benefit from simplification? Yes. Is changing the term "miles" to "points" the key? No.

Hey, at least miles are somewhat standardized (most airlines have about the same 25000 miles award, with just a couple smaller ones lowering that to 20000 or 15000 in some circumstances; no airline has a 10:1 ratio of the meaing of miles). The term "points" is already in use, but there's no standardization among points. For example, hotel programs call it points, but the ratio between some of them and others is 10-to-1! So the term "points" (without specificying the program) has no single meaning, while the term "miles" does. So you think changing it points would be less confusing? Only if everyone were dealing with only program. But the moment you deal with other programs, it gets more confusing.

Consider, for example, transferring credit card points (AMEX or Diners Club) to miles or points. At AMEX, they write things like "1000 points = 1000 miles" rather than "1000 MR points = 1000 miles", but it's still clear. But in the few cases where they transfer to points, they write gobblygook like "1000 points = 1300 points" and which points are which?

If you like points so much, stick with the airlines that use them! The new Virgin America does, JetBlue does, Qantas does, and Southwest uses credits. So what you propose already exists, but it's your job to choose the airline that uses that system if that's what you want (not the other airlines' job to change to mimic some LCCs).

Your whole analysis of how to earn and redeem points seems based on the shortsided notion that it's all domestic. Right now you can fly halfway across the world in a cramped economy seat for a certain number of miles, and if you want to fly the same route in business it's only double as many miles. But try to buy that seat and it's likely 5 to 10 times as much! Do you really want to lose the ability to get a "severe discount" by using miles? All airlines that use the "simplified" points system you descirbed lose the ability to get "severe discounts" like this. Sounds like you run airline rather than wanting to fly one if this is what you're proposing, because it sounds like it may or may not be good for the airline but it's certainly not good for the value-seeking passenger...

Additionally, because you're only collecting with United, you don't realize that (a) there are both miles and points at airlines such as AA and BA (different meanigs of points between AA and BA, but same meaning of miles!), and (b) the term "C" is not the right for business class among all airlines, so by calling it "C" you're introducing the same kind of confusion you accuse whoever called them "miles" of doing! (At AA, for example, "C" is an upgrade bucket only, and it's "J" for Business Class.)

Finally, it's all historic. Same reason it's called First Class when you fly the class above economy on a two-class plane within the US but the very moment that same plane flies an international leg the cabin gets renamed Business. Yet in your description you accept that as ok while ranting about miles? It's called miles because it started out (before any of those points programs you mention!) simple, without all the bonuses at first. It's called First Class in the US because it always was, and it's called Business outside the US because that's what airlines in the rest of the world called it when they added it (much later than the US).

PS. You can eliminate all the confusion you mentioned, btw, by simply prefixing the airilne to the term "miles" when you mean the currency, and leaving it off when you mean the distance. Thus: "I flew 12,500 miles round trip to/from Europe, but I earned UA 25,000 miles because I get double RDM due to my 1K status (which is actually from flying not 1,000 miles, but 100,000 miles, er, 80,000 miles with bonuses). Now I can redeem those UA 25,000 miles for a 5,000 mile roundtrip next month." With that very simple change, you eliminate all the confusion of the terminology. (It doesn't eliminate the confusion your parenthetical explanation of how you earned 1K is, but that confusion is the way you wrote sentence, not the term "miles". And any confusion about the name "1K" is UA-specific, why don't you tell them to change their tiers to silver/gold/platinum/whatever like most other airlines!)

Oh, and I don't know anyone who says "for a 5,000 mile roundtrip next month" (who measures the distance of their award trips if that is not how the award cost is determined???). Everyone I know call it "a coast-to-coast roundtrip" or names the specific destination they were able to go to for 25000 UA miles.

Points (e.g. hotel points) constantly get devalued while miles seem to retain their value better.

AA already has points, not redeemable for travel but for Qualification purposes. So we would have to rename those too.
Maybe

Miles -> Points
Points - > Boobs (Bob's Own Odd Benefits Systems)
Segments -> ASR ( A** Soreness Rating)

That would be much clearer, i think

BS. Europe had the same kind of first class as the U.S. It was called first class and it had the same kind of seating as in the U.S. Since no one (except very few) was paying for first class in Europe anymore, "business class" was introduced instead.

Originally business class was offered for pax paying the full economy fare. The seating was mostly converted to economy class seating with maybe just a little better seat pitch and the curtain that could be adjusted according to demand was introduced. IIRC Swissair and Lufthansa retained first class within Europe a little longer than the others.

The historic aspect is the most compelling reason why the term miles is used. As stated already, before there were partner programs and class of ticket bonuses one had to fly 25,000 miles to get a free RT domestic ticket. So when someone reached that many "miles" in their account the airline as well as the passenger knew "He/She/I flew a lot of da%m miles!!!".

Socialization and language trump logic and common sense all the time. Why do I have to pay a toll to drive on this freeway? (not "free" of charges but "free" of stop lights/signs) For that matter why do we drive on a parkway and park on a driveway? (unknown credit here for some stand-up comedian)

I remember the first time I used the term "over the counter" when I was an adolescent. I was corrected by ... oh I forget.. someone ...
"That means you don't need a prescription".
Me: "That doesn't make sense. I grab the item off the shelf, take it to the cashier, pay for it, and walk out the door. It never travels "over the counter".

Really, wouldn't it make more sense to say that you can't just buy that drug because the pharmacist keeps it "over the counter". Should we try to change the English-speaking world (maybe it is just an American thing) ? No, this is how we know it. Same with miles. Trying to make language logical is futile. Why do "may be" and "might be" have VERY different meanings but "maybe" and "might be" mean the same exact thing?

The MLA gave up years ago and now "to boldly go where no man has gone before" is accepted as correct English. Forty years ago it was the quintessential example of a split infinitive.

The term "miles" was used by many foreign carriers even though they used the metric system. The term will be around for a long time.

perhaps they could be called:

green stamps

credits

goodies

brownies, iirc was what you got selling the saturday evening post door to door...

i'm sure that there are any number of names....

the nut is you have to learn what each airline calls them and the catch 22's....

good luck...

The main bad thing about the term "FF miles" is that it confuses the non-expert public who are likely to buy a bridge from Trooper (Post #2.) If I tell someone I have earned 5000 FF miles, it's common for them to misunderstand that I have earned a free ticket from PHL--LAX & return! (about 5000 miles flown distance.) It blows their mind when I say that it costs 25000 miles to get an award ticket PHL--BWI & back!

It's the mind deliberately throwing common sense out the window in hopes of a big payoff (can you say "lottery"?). If the system were as some think each flight effectively gives you a free flight... 2-4-1. For family and friends under this misconception I simplify it with "fly 25,000 miles get a free domestic RT". Their eyes widen and jaws drop. This is usually because they have accumulated (sparse) miles through a credit card. There is an interesting thread in this forum (MilesBuzz!) which addresses this very issue. common issues among friends with miles & points they THINK work but don't..

It's without doubt people would love to have a PHL-LAX rt ticket at the cost of only 5K miles.

RJ, but how many miles would they willingly pay for PHL--BWI rt ?