kkjay77

Why I would pay UA W fare if I can't upgrade to NC or D to NF?
UA will need to upgrade its soft product a whole lot or significantly discount its fare over competition to make this work.
I don't see any of those happening.

hobo13

Dear OP,

Your 'modest' proposal is even worse than the garbage being floated by COdbaUA! Do you work for a spin firm?

EsquireFlyer

The OP's proposal does not include e500s or domestic upgrades of any kind for lower-tier elites.\

And in a later post, he adds that he wants to charge 2Ps $1000 per domestic upgrade.

Let's be clear, the OP's proposal is nothing like AA's system.

When E+ was first introduced in the 90s, was UA already offering online seat selection for most itineraries? If not, then the actually policy might not have been clear, as a result of inconsistent enforcement by phone agents.

cwpfly

It warms my heart to see how concerned people are for UA's financial health and how "generous" they can be are when taking away others' benefits.

I was going to ignore this thread, but just in case UA is actually reading this...

UA has tons of data to mine, so it can determine if there really is a problem. However, let's assume that there is a real issue of GS/1K pax that purchase at the last possible moment - we know that there is at least anecdotal evidence of a problem. Also, let's assume that DESPITE the probability that these pax are traveling for business, they do not understand the concept of a limited supply of a perishable product (good seats) so they get grumpy when they don't get one because other market participants have already claimed them. How can UA keep the egos of these pax unbruised AND maximize their own revenue?

Option 1 - the OP's "Modest Proposal" that would possibly keep these folks happy but would certainly alienate a much larger cohort of 1&2Ps.

Option 2 - Look at the darn data. UA can simply look at flight-level data and determine the average number of full-fare tix (however they choose to slice that data - Y, B, gov't...) that are purchased in the last 24 to 48 hours. Having completed their homework, UA can then block that data-driven number of seats in E+ and only allow entry into those seats within the appropriate time window by those pax fitting their desired filter (status, fares, etc). Whatever remains from this small subset of E+ releases at the gate. The remainder of E+ is available for assignment as before.

There we go - a modest proposal that actually addresses the problem and does not create an "us vs. them" within the elite ranks.

Fire away.

craz

Nonsense! seems all you want is to make sure you have CYA

Im a 1k and have been for 3 yrs and dont know if Im done with UA yet, but I can tell you I know plenty of 2Ps that put more $$ to UAs bottom line then many a 1K I know

If Im correct UA already has such a system as you are proposing its called GS, why oh why do I feel that you are far from ever being a GS and basically want to be a GS wantabe. Spend the $$ like a GS does and you can have all you are proposing plus alot more

sciflyer

I'm going out on a limb to suggest that UAGuy2 doesn't spend too much of his own money on the tickets that get him 1K status. I would suggest that his vaunted benefits, which he seems so entitled to, should actually go to his corporate travel department.

I've been a CO Gold or better elite for 12 straight years. Most of this has been traveling on my own dime, though I'm recently doing more work travel, some domestic and some international. I have done mile runs to get to gold status and I have bought premium tickets. Of 487 flights I have logged on FlightMemory (my.flightmemory.com/sciflyer), 371 have been on Continental and the majority of the rest on airlines that were CO partners at the time. I value the occasional upgrades, the priority seating, and free bags. Diminish those, and I see no reason to pay extra for CO/UA (which is usually the case) to be treated exactly the same as the Kettles.

If you are flying international business class on the company dime, then you are going to be treated like a king, regardless of your status on that airline. What you really want is for that to carry over to royal treatment when you're on vacation, or traveling on cheaper fare classes for work. And you are given priority over me and I do not question that. Instead, I question whether your loyalty to the airline, given that you're not paying for most of it, is greater than mine (since I am). Does the airline really want to piss me off to give kid glove treatment to someone with obvious ability and wherewithal to switch carriers at the drop of a hat?

mre5765

Since 2007 I've been a 1k, and I don't like his proposal either. Although he is on the right track with getting rid of udu for 1p and 2p. Get rid of it for 1k too. Instead keep existing rdm bonuses for 1p and 2p and give 1ks a 200 percent rdm bonus. Then 1ks who want to upgrade more can use rdms after the cr1s are used up.

As for bag fees, charging 2ps for bag fees, means that on hub to hub flights, with current devaluation of elite boarding, 1ks will never find overhead space.

Modest he says?

mduell

I am disappointed your proposal does not involve eating children. Please refrain from the modest proposal allusion in future posts that do not actually involve the proposed consumption of children.

SFOTurtle

I'm a 1K (as indicated by the program info) and I was a 1P for the prior five years. I just don't feel like I'm entitled to bump someone who has at least demonstrated some loyalty (2P, 1P, 1K of course) from their seat when they've taken the time to plan further ahead than I have. Most of the time there is no problem getting an upgrade or paying for F or C if I'm traveling for work and the flight is long enough to justify paying for F or C workspace and legroom. And most of the time I'm quite content to fly in E+. There have been one or two times when I was not able to pre-select a good seat on a long flight and upgrade chances didn't look good, so I simply chose another flight.

One of the most important benefits when I was a 1P was the ability to pre-book exit rows. While I agree in principle that E+ shouldn't be given away for "free" at the expense of 1Ks and GS or 1Ps or 2Ps, I consider the 50+K EQM I earned on UA as a 1P as more than enough compensation to UA to earn the right to pre-book E+ -- certainly more than 48 hours in advance. If I am only to maintain *G status in future years, and UACO removes this benefit, this is another factor to encourage disloyalty to UACO.

Noodle

No more changes please _ segment qualifiers already screwed having to fly 20% more this year for same benefits!

EsquireFlyer

Spot on.

marshall200

Are you too greedy with your SWU and Regional upgrades ?
Your suggestions are well crap. and I say this as a UA 1K/CO Plat/CO MM

I have been loyal to Continental for 20 years to become a MM - which after the merger is complete will prob. still only give me lifetime silver, If the benifits were stipped to what you suggest I would never fly UA ever again.

beside if Elites do not take up the E+ seats who's to say the the general public wouldnt buy them up still leaving you stuck in E-.

ezefllying

I would like to know where the OP and others learned that UA's current E+, upgrade, and other elite-benefit strategies are "not sustainable" or "unaffordable" to the company. How adding three extra inches of legroom, meaning the loss of two or three rows, to certain seats to reward loyalty is destroying the airline is beyond me. At the same time as UA and other U.S. carriers are trying to reduce capacity, reducing seat counts slightly while creating a powerful (and, for tall passengers like me, very powerful) incentive to fly UA seems like an obvious double-win for the airline.

What really bemuses me about some of the posters here is that they make sweeping pronouncements about the financial interests of the carriers based on the econometric data within their minds. (I would hazard a guess that the individual proposing $2000 (two thousand dollar) domestic upgrade fees for non-elites is not in revenue management.) And, at the same time as these individuals condemn those insipid low-elite masses as virtually worthless for only flying (a minimum of) 25,000 or 50,000 miles per year, they herald themselves as virtually indispensable to the carrier for flying twice that (or, perhaps, flying several thousand more miles annually than the 80K-mile-per-year 1P).

Of course, I suspect much of their flying is paid for by their employers, who are probably less loyalty-oriented than self-funded elites. So, as a matter of allocating elite benefits to bring in revenue a given airline would not otherwise earn, perhaps the airlines should consider finding a way to maximize the benefits to those most likely to pay for their own travel. How's that for a modest (and facetious) proposal?

In short, I bet the elite-benefits system generally benefits United, and that the OP would be well-advised to look at their economic data, were it accessible, before offering his free consulting services to the airline.

dfe

While I encourage the exchange of ideas and proposals, and fully enjoy some of the posts in this thread, these last minute sugggestions "modest" or not as to how the new program should be structured are pretty much a waste of time and bandwith at this late date--even though I have read all of them.

With only 20 days to go at most until the end of the month when the new program is announced "late in the month" I bet the program is signed, sealed and only waiting to be delivered. I seriously doubt that the MP revisionist team at UACO are anxiously sitting in their cubicles awaiting ideas for changes coming from this forum so they can craft their new plan overnight on the 29th.

My guess is that the press releases and e-mail notifications are already in the works. At this point we can only wait and see and then react.

AZjohns

OK, here is my suggestion of a modest proposal for revising elite benefits:

Very High $ rev/volume customer (let’s call it Global Service for example):
• They get moved up front on all domestic/international 100 hours out
• VIP service in all area’s

100K EQM customer (let’s call this one 100K for example)
• UDU’s only at gate
• 6 SWU per year (with reasonable NF/NC availability in advance)
• 8CR1’s per year (with reasonable NF availability in advance)
• e-500’s per 10K EQM’s flown
• Free lounge access on international flights
• Free baggage and E+ (including exits seats)

50K EQM customer (let’s call them 50K for example)
• UDU’s only at gate after 1K
• No SWU’s per year
• 4 CR1’s per year (with reasonable NF availability in advance)
• e-500’s per 10K EQM’s flown
• Free lounge access on international flights
• Free baggage and E+ (including exits seats)

25K EQM customer (let’s call them Premier for example)
• No UDU’s
• No SWU’s per year
• No CR1’s per year
• E-500’s per 10K EQM’s flown
• Free baggage and E+ (exit seats at gate)

GM
• They get a seat in back

I know, just too simple of a plan that would never work……