Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > United Airlines | MileagePlus
Reload this Page >

United CFO Rainey Implies Certain Elites were "Over Entitled".

United CFO Rainey Implies Certain Elites were "Over Entitled".

Old May 23, 2012, 9:50 am
  #1006  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: SJC, SFO, YYC
Programs: AA-EXP, AA-0.41MM, UA-Gold, Ex UA-1K (2006 thru 2015), PMUA-0.95MM, COUA-1.5MM-lite, AF-Silver
Posts: 13,437
Originally Posted by Fredd
It would make some sense for UA to exclude the newly designated "Million Milers" from the list. First, there are a lot more than there used to be. Second, IMHO UA deliberately cheapened that meaning.
The irony is that UA took away benefits from all elites and most MMers, but then added entitlements to the MM program that no pmco or pmua was asking for. E.g.

pmco 1MMers didn't ask for lifetime gold.

pmua 1MMers didn't ask for companion status.

And given that UA showered its members with life time miles on Dec 31, UA "over entitled" a vast number of members and their companions.

Originally Posted by njcommodore
Didn't UA close the red carpet after the initial 1K/GS/F boarding? CO left the blue carpet open during all of boarding, allowing elites to board whenever we chose. I'll take 10-15 more minutes in the club over being forced to get there early.
It was a mixed bag. Official written policy was that 1K/GS/F/J could board through the red lane at any time, but reports were that some GAs closed the lane once group 1 was called. I never experienced that though.
mre5765 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 9:59 am
  #1007  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Montebello, CA, USA
Posts: 2,362
Originally Posted by AeroWesty
Go back to what UA Insider said. The implication was that Golds and above were seeing a higher ability to get seated in E+, without there being a demonstrative decline in Silvers being seated in E+, while admitting some may be getting there through purchasing E+ rather than waiting for T-24. Both statements can't be true, when you think about it.
I too thought both these statements cannot be true, however:

"a higher ability to get seated" - that sounds like saying only that more seats are available for Gold+, not that they are actually sitting in them. Especially if the number of Silvers in E+ is the same. I think that "a higher ability to get seated" sounds like spin in a way.

On the flip side of this though, it is still relatively early in the new system to really tell patterns. When UA switched from e500's to complimentary upgrades, we scored a bunch of those as Premiers in the early days (for previous booked reservations, you had to have an agent touch your res or you wouldn't be added to the queue), and then our percentages dropped substantially once the system was in place for awhile.
wcj1 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:05 am
  #1008  
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,010
Originally Posted by AeroWesty
Go back to what UA Insider said. The implication was that Golds and above were seeing a higher ability to get seated in E+, without there being a demonstrative decline in Silvers being seated in E+, while admitting some may be getting there through purchasing E+ rather than waiting for T-24. Both statements can't be true, when you think about it.
One possible explanation is that there are less Silvers and/or less Silvers booking UA now due to the reduced benefits--therefore, the remaining ones do have an easier go at getting E+.

Another is that loads on UA are down (certainly my anecdotal experiences post-3/3 have been leaning that way), and thus E+ seats are easier to come by for all.
exerda is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:06 am
  #1009  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Please, you are doing a disservice to the FT community and the random few others who may stumble in here.
The above post is speaking to itself.

Originally Posted by LarkSFO
If YOUR experience is worse than last year, I'll buy that and continue to hope it gets better for you.
It won't this year.

Originally Posted by LarkSFO
But please don't take your experience and try and extrapolate that to the experience of all UA elites.
If only the above were relevant, but it isn't relevant to this thread. The objective conclusion I've communicated about UA failing 1ks goes well beyond being merely derived from one individual's experiences.

Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Sell the stock short today then. Let us know how much money you make when they announce next quarters results.
Familiar with "short-term gains costing long-term returns" and with the limited returns from simple open short positions? Those with a true clue about finance and the operations of public companies wouldn't suggest what was suggested in the above post absent some hedging.

Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Per Mr. Rainey's comments, I believe a gradual decline in revenue is a part of their plan. Capacity has gone down 6% since 2006. China market currently has 'too much capacity', and we should expect to see reductions.

The new United does not want to chase market share and revenue.

They want to be a profitable, viable airline and are making the changes required to achieve this objective.
Can COdbaUA really afford much of a decline in revenue without ending up in bankruptcy yet again? Don't confuse pursuing an increase in revenue with a decline in revenue.

Capacity can be cut in some ways without corresponding revenue declines, and that's more of what COdbaUA seeks than what LarkSFO's post is trying to suggest.
GUWonder is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:13 am
  #1010  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Dallas, TX, AA 3MM EXP, WN
Posts: 1,808
One of the things not mentioned here is this could be a two fold hit on revenue. FF programs are a money making machine for the airlines, selling points to credit cards, hotels etc. A UA elite moves to AA will now use AA credit card thus UA not only loses the fare but also the FF program revenue. I would not want to be the UA credit card company right now.
MrMan is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:14 am
  #1011  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: body: A stone's throw from SFO, mind: SE Asia
Programs: Some of this 'n some of that
Posts: 17,263
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
So, now you are rooting for UA to fail?

Talk about delusional...

Check back with me on 5/23/2013 and we'll see where things are.
Not sure how you get to that determination from this:
Originally Posted by dsquared37
Originally Posted by njcommodore View Post
Anyone who thinks UA will have a huge drop in revenue over changes to MP isn't over entitled, they're delusional (or self absorbed).
Time will tell. I'm hoping you're wrong.

Originally Posted by LarkSFO
He said he wants to see UA in bankruptcy. Sounds like he is rooting for UA to fail.

I understand your perspective as well - you want UA to do poorly enough that Smisek and Co. are removed.

Be careful what you wish for, a new regime could just as easily be worse for elites...
Never said I wanted to see COdbaUA in bankruptcy; you're attaching motive to my posts that doesn't exist.

I do want to see these crooks taken out of their roles at the head of COdbaUA

Originally Posted by UA-NYC
I don't root for BK, but I do root for enough short term failure that would lead to a new leadership team. Presumably one selected to not continue down the ill-advised $misek & Rainey path, but rather realize it's okay to try to make money and treat your valued customers well.
Amen.
dsquared37 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:18 am
  #1012  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
I did find this comment in Mr. Rainey's presentation to be quite interesting. SHARES has the ability to support Dynamic seat pricing... (I assume Apollo did not?)

This certainly does mean that they have more 'levers' that they can use to adjust / fine tune the system to maximize revenue on an (almost) real time basis...
Correct. One of the ways--potentially-they can do that is by changing the procedure and algorithms of ToD's...

I'm not implying that ToD's are out-and-out intentional, and it's likely their implementation is ridden with glitches, but this is certainly something they could do with SHARES.
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:23 am
  #1013  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SEA & RDM
Programs: UA - 1MM, DL Diamond, AS MVP75, Marriott Titanium, Hilton Gold
Posts: 8,017
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
I did find this comment in Mr. Rainey's presentation to be quite interesting. SHARES has the ability to support Dynamic seat pricing... (I assume Apollo did not?)

This certainly does mean that they have more 'levers' that they can use to adjust / fine tune the system to maximize revenue on an (almost) real time basis...
This is exactly what is going on with ToDs. During the check-in they drop the price of F (Y&B) fares so they can sell them for ToDs but claim that the ToD UGers are simply paying the fare difference.
andyh64000 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:28 am
  #1014  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SFO and OAK
Programs: FAF, Hyatt <>, SPG PLT
Posts: 2,240
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Extending E+ fleet wide? (If they only made this one change, that would be enough for me to dedicate the majority of my flying to UA.)
Originally Posted by LarkSFO
Seeing as I don't ride in 'steerage' anyway, this won't be an issue.


Are you saying you would dedicate the majority of your flying to United if they made a change to seating in an area of the plane where you don't sit?
Beerman92 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:30 am
  #1015  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Programs: UA 1K 3.01MM Hyatt Globalist (Lifetime) AA ExPlat (real), Lifetime UniClub (not from the 2MM).
Posts: 173
Originally Posted by MrMan
FF programs are a money making machine for the airlines, selling points to credit cards, hotels etc. A UA elite moves to AA will now use AA credit card thus UA not only loses the fare but also the FF program revenue.
Someone switching from MileagePlus for travel, will likely also switch from MileagePlus shopping, MileagePlus Dining, etc. all of which generate cash for the airline.

I would not want to be the UA credit card company right now.
As a 1K 2.85 Million Miler with lifetime United Club (purchased in 31 December 1995, issued in July of 1996), almost none of the benefits of the Explorer have any value to me. I get 3 bags (and do not get to add the 1 given by the card), I already board ahead of card holders, and two United club passes just do not seem that important. :-)
majortom is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:31 am
  #1016  
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,010
Originally Posted by andyh64000
This is exactly what is going on with ToDs. During the check-in they drop the price of F (Y&B) fares so they can sell them for ToDs but claim that the ToD UGers are simply paying the fare difference.
And I wouldn't have a problem with that--hey, if they want to offer discounted F (or Y/B/M) fares at the last minute, fine and dandy--if the buy-ups were offered consistently to elites.

What annoys me is when my no-status friend on the same fare is offered a ToD (say, $89 on LAS-ORD), and I'm offered the full buy-up (say, $389), as we check in side-by-side at two kiosks. Or when at OLCI, my wife gets an offer to buy up, and I don't get one at all.
exerda is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:38 am
  #1017  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Denver DEN-APA
Programs: AF Platinum, EK Gold, LH Senator *Gold, AA EXP OWE Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 21,555
Originally Posted by exerda
And I wouldn't have a problem with that--hey, if they want to offer discounted F (or Y/B/M) fares at the last minute, fine and dandy--if the buy-ups were offered consistently to elites. What annoys me is when my no-status friend on the same fare is offered a ToD (say, $89 on LAS-ORD), and I'm offered the full buy-up (say, $389), as we check in side-by-side at two kiosks. Or when at OLCI, my wife gets an offer to buy up, and I don't get one at all.
Yes, but you've flown F a lot. It's only fair that others who have not experienced F as much as you be given the opportunity.
SFO777 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:41 am
  #1018  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Programs: DL SM Plat, B6 TrueBlue, UA MP, AAdvantage
Posts: 10,008
Originally Posted by exerda
And I wouldn't have a problem with that--hey, if they want to offer discounted F (or Y/B/M) fares at the last minute, fine and dandy--if the buy-ups were offered consistently to elites.

What annoys me is when my no-status friend on the same fare is offered a ToD (say, $89 on LAS-ORD), and I'm offered the full buy-up (say, $389), as we check in side-by-side at two kiosks. Or when at OLCI, my wife gets an offer to buy up, and I don't get one at all.
Can you say "dynamic pricing?"

Of course, make it a little too "dynamic" and it can get out of control pretty quickly...
TWA Fan 1 is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:45 am
  #1019  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PDX
Posts: 2,284
Originally Posted by wcj1
it is still relatively early in the new system to really tell patterns.
Originally Posted by exerda
One possible explanation is that there are less Silvers and/or less Silvers booking UA now due to the reduced benefits--therefore, the remaining ones do have an easier go at getting E+.
Good points. UA does have the actual numbers, while we don'tit would be interesting to see what those "higher percentages" are that UA Insider referenced as a counterpoint to majortom's experiences.

Below is Shannon's quote, bolding mine:

An example of this is when our Premier tiers get access to Economy Plus seating. This change has materialized into a meaningfully better experience for our Gold members and above. In fact, in markets that have the highest proportion of Premier flyers, a higher percentage of Premier Platinum and Premier Gold members are getting access to Economy Plus (comparing February 2012 to April 2012, and comparing April 2011 to April 2012), while the percentage of Premier Silver members sitting in Economy Plus hasnt decreased meaningfully. Some of those Premier Silver members may be choosing to purchase Economy Plus seating, but, in general, Economy Plus seating remains available at time of check-in.
AeroWesty is offline  
Old May 23, 2012, 10:49 am
  #1020  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: LHR (sometimes CLE, SFO, BOS, LAX, SEA)
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 5,889
Originally Posted by AeroWesty
Good points. UA does have the actual numbers, while we don'tit would be interesting to see what those "higher percentages" are that UA Insider referenced as a counterpoint to majortom's experiences.
Below is Shannon's quote, bolding mine:
An example of this is when our Premier tiers get access to Economy Plus seating. This change has materialized into a meaningfully better experience for our Gold members and above. In fact, in markets that have the highest proportion of Premier flyers, a higher percentage of Premier Platinum and Premier Gold members are getting access to Economy Plus (comparing February 2012 to April 2012, and comparing April 2011 to April 2012), while the percentage of Premier Silver members sitting in Economy Plus hasnt decreased meaningfully. Some of those Premier Silver members may be choosing to purchase Economy Plus seating, but, in general, Economy Plus seating remains available at time of check-in.
So in elite-heavy markets, more top-tier elites are in E+ and the same number of low-tier elites are in E+? I have difficulty understanding where the extra E+ seats came from CO equipment reconfigured to contain E+? Or are more top-tier elites staying in coach?
mherdeg is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.