bseller

There, fixed that for you.

UA has no problem screwing the elites--PERIOD.
Just makes it easier for the HouCrew to monetize everything. In fortress hubs, that's a winner. In hubs where pax have a CHOICE, I'm guessing not so much. We'll see.

Dave

star_world

How do you arrive at that conclusion? There are always going to be many more Silver elites who would select an E+ seat for free than people willing to pay $30-100 for it.

As a higher level elite I think the current process is great. The vast numbers of silver elites aren't able to select E+ seats in advance unless they pay just like anyone else, which deters the vast majority of them and results in significantly better availability. Anything that is left over, they can pick 24 hours out.

halls120

This is probably going to get me kicked out of the gang of 11, but IME UA is doing the same thing that other carriers are doing when it comes to E+, and I don't have a problem with it. I'm a GM on DL, and if I want a seat with more leg room, I have to pay extra for it. Medallion Silvers can't secure economy comfort for free until they are in the check-in window. The fact that UA doesn't let Silvers reserve until the same time may be a benefit loss from pmUA, but it is consistent with the competition.

I was on a UA flight the other day, and a Kettle tried to finesse her way into E+ without paying, and the GA wouldn't let her without paying. I wanted to applaud him.

there is a reason MP was voted #1 for so many years, and that is because it was more generous than the competition. Good for us customers, apparently bad for the bottom line. I think right now, most of the long time pmUA customers think the pendulum has swung too far in the wrong direction. Hopefully things will moderate as the merger goes forward, and some of the lost benefits will come back.

channa

The whole E+ discussion is a red herring -- a deliberate distraction by UA to attempt to justify the CFO's comment.

Just like the comment about more higher Elites are sitting in E+ now -- well yeah, there are more E+ seats now with the CO fleet getting E+.

Madone59

They are not your/ our seats. They are UA's seats and even though this feels a little bit like playing Monopoly with a little sibling, because the rules keep changing, one thing has never changed. ALL upgrades are subject to availability. GPU, RPU, CPU, YBM up’s………. are all limited by space no matter who you are or what your status is.

Of course I don’t want to see F seats taken up by anyone other than those who pay, FTer’s and myself but this is a business and the $50, $100, $300 UA get's by selling a TOD to a GM is a lot better than the big fat $0 they would get from putting me in that seat.

Say La’ Vie. Travel less popular routes off peak hours, leave UA, or build a bridge!

star_world

Is that because it makes good logical sense and detracts from your agenda? Or because it doesn't apply to (or actually benefits) higher level elites and as a result means they can't claim that the comments from the CFO really did apply to them?

1KPath

Yup!...it reminds me of what UA ...especially 1K reservations and customer service used to be like! The problem the "new' UA faces is that there are many, many of us PMUA customers that remember the service we used to receive...only a few short months ago! Whatever the cause...the transition to Shares, the adoption of new policies...UA customer service is now a mere shadow of what we were used to (for our organization, over 35 years worth)...and I am not talking about extreme benefits, just competent customer service with employees that are empowered to solve problems and provide a seamless trouble-free travel experience. So is it any wonder that there are those of us that seek this elsewhere...that AA, DL, US, CX, BA, NZ, to name a few, still provide!

It is obvious to those of us that have been associated with the airline industry for a number of years (58 for me) that Mr. Rainey's comments and other actions coming from the CEO and corporate are indicative of of the "bean counter" mentality that has overrun many airlines in this industry...and the loss of "real" airline people is resulting in the dehumanization of airline travel! When you lose the concept of an airline providing service but rather travel becoming a commodity...well, here we are!
Sad, Sad, Sad!

Superguy

The difference on DL is that is was never a perk before for anyone ... period. DL added something new and decided who would get it. Thus DL didn't take anything away from anyone as it was never a benefit to begin with. DL also gives their silvers a discount on it over the kettles. UA does not. Silvers on UA get the exact same thing the kettles get, or can pick over the leftovers at 24 hours for free.

As a gold on DL, you get it 50% off international, but free domestically.

Also, DL gives it free for Y, B, and M fares. UA expected me to pay $150 each way on the TPAC segments on a full Y fare.

There's a very big difference between how UA and DL are handling it.

As they should. If UA's going to charge for it otherwise, I'd be pissed if I had to pay for it and a non-elite got it free for non-ops reasons.

In the meantime, many will try other carriers. Some will return, but most likely won't.

UnitedEF

Yeah because when I am paying $300 r/t LAX - LAS instead of flying WN or B6 for $150 or connecting when I could have taken a direct flight on another carrier all so I can credit to my UA account I didn't pay it forward and earn my upgrades

Which isn't hard to do. Even a carrier in Ch. 11 still provides superior service compared to UA. Just look at the pictures of the food on the AA forum and the attitudes of AA people being reported here. So are there any added destinations that BR serves that you cannot get to now on a *A carrier? Sure there will be added ward inventory but there will also be added redeemers that BR brings into *A. Glad to have them but won't fly them unless it's the last option.

7182713

as usual the thread starts out venomous and gets less so as time passes...as the harsh reality sets in...we fly UA because they are the most convenient, get us and our bags safely to destination, generally, on time...many, many will continue to do so...

1 - 1Ks feel the perceived changes the most because they live it every week - silvers have flown, maybe, once since the merger...1ks fly the same routes at the same times week after week - they know things are different..because they are different...CFO comments just verbalized what is being experienced in reality...
2 - this strategy can work domestically - they can find kayakers to replace 1Ks...Internationally? delusion as far as I can tell...I can't see how this strategy works for the massive international loads UA has...

time will tell...really, really unfortunate developments for all UA elites for sure.

c502cid

Even though I've made the decision to stick with UA for the time being, I just booked my first trip on AA to qualify for a challenge that gives me 50000 expired miles back for flying a round trip.

I really know no one at UA has exposure to it or will see, care, or even notice, but I am smiling booking the trip on my Chase United Mileage Plus card. If anyone does notice I'm going to tell them it is a "glitch".

UnitedEF

Perhaps it is less venomous now since most of those people are truly done with UA and have moved over to their new airline boards

P.S. I booked AA for those LAX - LAS trips now Just paid the same $300 R/T flight times are about the same and will be sitting on a new AA 738

AK-business-traveler

You're definitely right about the international business - who in their right minds would willingly choose UA over the competition for a TATL or TPAC these days? There's very little incentive to do so when the product is inferior and UA's not competitive on the pricing.

bseller

KA-ching!!!!!!
@:-)

majortom

As I 1K with 2.85 Million Miles, dating another 1K with .7 Million Miles and whose father gets close to 50,000 miles a year (usually below), these comments offended me, primarily because they match my experience that coDBAua no longer cares about me. However, even if he was speaking of my father, I am am still offended - "over-entitled" is simply not a phrase that describes him.