Oct 1, 2013, 3:03 pm
Last edit by: Ari
PLEASE READ FIRST: WIKIPOST and MODERATOR NOTE
MODERATOR NOTE:
Please note: Insensitive or attacking posts, discussion about other posters and their motives, and other off-topic posts/comments are not allowed, per FlyerTalk Rules.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you.
N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
--> If you have a question or comment about moderation, use the "Alert a Moderator" button
left of every post, or send a PM. Do not post such comments/questions on-thread. Thank you. N.B. Please do not alter the above message.
• • • • •
[Please post
NLY status updates and relevant Q&A here.]Plaintiff: George Lagen, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Defendant: United Continental Holdings, Inc. and United Airlines, Inc.
Filed In The United States District Court For The Northern District Of Illinois Eastern Division
Case No. 1:12-cv-04056
Filed: 05/24/2012
Judge Harry D. Leinenweber
Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim
Proposed class: All persons, as of midnight, December 31, 2011, who were members of the Million Mile Program under United Airlines’ Mileage Plus frequent flyer program.
Filings/rulings can be found on www.pacer.gov (requires registration)
12 June 2012 - Amended Class Action Complaint filed
Spring 2013 - Court denies United's request to close case
Spring 2013 - Plaintiff files for suit to become a class action, United asks Judge before he decides if there could be limited discovery (which typically happens after case becomes class-action). Judge allows it.
August 2013 - Depositions/Limited Discovery completed and transcripts were handed over to the court.
22 October 2013 - Pursuant to an order of the Court, both sides filed cross-motions for summary judgment:
Plaintiff contends that he is a United pre-merger Million Miler, that United promised Million Miler fliers certain lifetime benefits on its web site, including two regional upgrades every year and Premier Executive status, which provided certain delineated benefits (e.g., 100% mileage bonus). Plaintiff cites deposition testimony from United stating "lifetime" means: "as long as they were really able to fly … as long as someone is coming on a plane and alive and capable of flying." Plaintiff concludes by stating that United has breached its contract with its pre-merger Million Miler fliers by reducing the lifetime benefits they were promised.
United contends in its motion that Million Miler is part of the MileagePlus program, that United reserved the right to make any changes it wishes to the MileagePlus program, and that the changes it made that plaintiff now complains of are therefore contractually permissible. United does not admit, and does not address, the "lifetime" benefit statements that it made on its website.
23 January 2014 - Judge denies Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and grants United's cross-motion for summary judgment. Judgment entered in favor of United.
The Judge begins his Opinion with a quote from Job: “The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away” and then holds that Plaintiff has not produced any evidence that UA made him an offer to participate in a separate MM program.
The Court noted that: “The sum total of his evidence is vague references to ‘electronic and written correspondence’ from United, which, in both instances postdates his qualification as a Million Mile flyer and was not directed to him; and a 1997 Newsletter from United announcing the creation of the program he could not remember receiving. However the card he did receive from United, admitting him to MililionMile Flyer Program, shows that his new status is clearly a status within the Mileage Plus Frequent Flyer Program, as does the form letters United sent to applicants advising them of their admission to the MillionMile Flyer program. In fact, Plaintiff in his Complaint alleges that the MillionMile Flyer program was part of the Mileage Plus program. He has not produced any document that comes close to substantiating that the programs were separate and distinct."
Bottom line: The Court agreed with United's position that the Plaintiff had not proved the existence of a separate contract between itself and the Million Milers.
Full decision: http://media.wandr.me/MMerOpinion.pdf
20 February 2014
Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the trial court's decision. The record on appeal is due by March 13, 2014.
Appeal docs available at:
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-Appeal-filed-2-20-14.pdf
- http://media.wandr.me/UAL-MM-letter-of-appeal.pdf
8 September 2014
Oral arguments were heard by a three judge panel. Links to the original MP3 of the Court's recording and also some transcription can be found around post 2350 and for several more following that.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/23496499-post2361.html
22 December 2014
Affirmed over a dissent.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2014/D12-22/C:14-1375:J:Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1474449:S:0
Million Miler Sues United [Judgment for UA Jan 2014] Judgment Affirmed Dec 2014
May 31, 2012, 6:39 pm
#151
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 38,638
It also would be a different case if they came out with "Effective 1/1/14 (i.e., long term notice), if you haven't yet met Million Mile Status" the MM program for those reaching it after that date are X, Y and Z.
"We can sell you a bill of goods and promises but change the T&C at any time and give you the royal F-over" carries about as much weight as the release that I signed at a gym years ago that they tried to wave in my face when a defective piece of their equipment sent me flying on the floor, with months of PT and an then an epidural.
May 31, 2012, 7:14 pm
#152
Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Programs: Marriott Titanium -> United Silver
Posts: 937
Not much damage IMO. Honestly, most people (a) aren't loyal to an airline if they can get a cheaper ticket on another or (b) are loyal to a FF program for geographic convenience. For example, if you live in Houston you are probably going to try to get status on United, whether or not Delta has a superior FF program. There are only a handful of cities where flyers have a real choice between programs that can offer actual benefits. Rewarding passengers who are going to fly the airline anyway is nice, but isn't good business.
May 31, 2012, 8:34 pm
#153
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
Not much damage IMO. Honestly, most people (a) aren't loyal to an airline if they can get a cheaper ticket on another or (b) are loyal to a FF program for geographic convenience. For example, if you live in Houston you are probably going to try to get status on United, whether or not Delta has a superior FF program. There are only a handful of cities where flyers have a real choice between programs that can offer actual benefits. Rewarding passengers who are going to fly the airline anyway is nice, but isn't good business.
-
I travel to South America about ten times each year, sometimes more often. From my city on the West Coast, there is only one carrier that flies non-stop from here to South America, and it is not UA. Non stop flights are always a more convenient method of travel.
In order to reach million-mile status on UA, I chose UA with connections in ORD and/or IAD to get to South America, although I would have preferred the other carrier with its non stop flight.
Having to make connections adds a lot of time to a trip. It also adds anxiety due to the possibility of missing the connecting flight. Not only that, many of the UA flight attendants are "burned out" due to terrible morale issues within UA. The attitudes and low morale of many flight attendants reflect their unhappiness in the way they seem to hate their job.
Moreover, many of us who were close to reaching million-miles after the announcement of the merger in 2010, accelerated our travel on UA and took trips we normally would not have taken except for the written promises that appeared for at least one year on united.com.
Those promises assured customers that the million-mile program would not change. The fact that the new UA management breached those assurances shown on united.com website, clearly has a negative affect on customer goodwill.
The recent bad press concerning the CFO insulting elites by saying that "certain" elites were "over-entitled" also negatively affects goodwill.
The lawsuit will cause many to focus on the way the new UA management treated its loyal elites, with callous disregard. This also negatively affects goodwill. It will cause a future potentially loyal customer not to trust the new management. This would cause a decrease in revenue resulting in further damage to UA's goodwill.
Another factor is the disorganized manner that is now used for boarding a UA aircraft. Those loyal passengers who earned 1K elite status are now bunched in a herd with all other elites. In other words, when almost everyone on the plane is at least some elite, then there are no elites. There is little more than disorganization at the outset of a trip with the changes instituted by Smisek.
Smisek is determined to run the airline like a pseudo military organization, with no frills (no pillows in first class, no special coffee etc etc etc).
Those who do remain and reach high elites status with UA will simply be Smisek's junior officers who will march in lock-step the way Smisek orders them to walk until they get fed up and abandon their allegiance to UA.
There is no question that the goodwill of the former UA has taken a severe decline in the publics' eyes as well as in the eyes of 1K elites and particularly those elites that reached million-mile status. Why else would a class action be filed?
I say, "BRAVO" to the class action.
-
May 31, 2012, 8:39 pm
#154
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ZOA, SFO, HKG
Programs: UA 1K 0.9MM, Marriott Gold, HHonors Gold, Hertz PC, SBux Gold, TSA Pre✓
Posts: 13,811
May 31, 2012, 8:40 pm
#155
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: ABQ & RNO
Programs: AA EXP 4MM, Piper Dakota, Admirals Club, Hyatt Glob, Hilton Gold, Wyndham Diamond
Posts: 1,426
With all due respect, I must disagree with you. There is a lot of damage to the goodwill of UA. The recent mass exodus of loyal UA 1K's to AA and to DL have put a huge dent in the current revenue of UA. Long-term loyal customers do not abandon a company that treated them well unless something serious occurred as has happened at UA. Clearly, the invasion of Smisek and his crew has damaged the good name of UA.
I travel to South America about ten times each year, sometimes more often. From my city on the West Coast, there is only one carrier that flies non-stop from here to South America, and it is not UA. Non stop flights are always a more convenient method of travel.
In order to reach million-mile status on UA, I chose UA with connections in ORD and/or IAD to get to South America, although I would have preferred the other carrier with its non stop flight.
Having to make connections adds a lot of time to a trip. It also adds anxiety due to the possibility of missing the connecting flight. Not only that, many of the UA flight attendants are "burned out" due to terrible morale issues within UA. The attitudes and low morale of many flight attendants reflect their unhappiness in the way they seem to hate their job.
Moreover, many of us who were close to reaching million-miles after the announcement of the merger in 2010, accelerated our travel on UA and took trips we normally would not have taken except for the written promises that appeared for at least one year on united.com.
Those promises assured customers that the million-mile program would not change. The fact that the new UA management breached those assurances shown on united.com website, clearly has a negative affect on customer goodwill.
The recent bad press concerning the CFO insulting elites by saying that "certain" elites were "over-entitled" also negatively affects goodwill.
The lawsuit will cause many to focus on the way the new UA management treated its loyal elites, with callous disregard. This also negatively affects goodwill. It will cause a future potentially loyal customer not to trust the new management. This would cause a decrease in revenue resulting in further damage to UA's goodwill.
Another factor is the disorganized manner that is now used for boarding a UA aircraft. Those loyal passengers who earned 1K elite status are now bunched in a herd with all other elites. In other words, when almost everyone on the plane is at least some elite, then there are no elites. There is little more than disorganization at the outset of a trip with the changes instituted by Smisek.
Smisek is determined to run the airline like a pseudo military organization, with no frills (no pillows in first class, no special coffee etc etc etc).
Those who do remain and reach high elites status with UA will simply be Smisek's junior officers who will march in lock-step the way Smisek orders them to walk until they get fed up and abandon their allegiance to UA.
There is no question that the goodwill of the former UA has taken a severe decline in the publics' eyes as well as in the eyes of 1K elites and particularly those elites that reached million-mile status. Why else would a class action be filed?
I say, "BRAVO" to the class action.
-
I travel to South America about ten times each year, sometimes more often. From my city on the West Coast, there is only one carrier that flies non-stop from here to South America, and it is not UA. Non stop flights are always a more convenient method of travel.
In order to reach million-mile status on UA, I chose UA with connections in ORD and/or IAD to get to South America, although I would have preferred the other carrier with its non stop flight.
Having to make connections adds a lot of time to a trip. It also adds anxiety due to the possibility of missing the connecting flight. Not only that, many of the UA flight attendants are "burned out" due to terrible morale issues within UA. The attitudes and low morale of many flight attendants reflect their unhappiness in the way they seem to hate their job.
Moreover, many of us who were close to reaching million-miles after the announcement of the merger in 2010, accelerated our travel on UA and took trips we normally would not have taken except for the written promises that appeared for at least one year on united.com.
Those promises assured customers that the million-mile program would not change. The fact that the new UA management breached those assurances shown on united.com website, clearly has a negative affect on customer goodwill.
The recent bad press concerning the CFO insulting elites by saying that "certain" elites were "over-entitled" also negatively affects goodwill.
The lawsuit will cause many to focus on the way the new UA management treated its loyal elites, with callous disregard. This also negatively affects goodwill. It will cause a future potentially loyal customer not to trust the new management. This would cause a decrease in revenue resulting in further damage to UA's goodwill.
Another factor is the disorganized manner that is now used for boarding a UA aircraft. Those loyal passengers who earned 1K elite status are now bunched in a herd with all other elites. In other words, when almost everyone on the plane is at least some elite, then there are no elites. There is little more than disorganization at the outset of a trip with the changes instituted by Smisek.
Smisek is determined to run the airline like a pseudo military organization, with no frills (no pillows in first class, no special coffee etc etc etc).
Those who do remain and reach high elites status with UA will simply be Smisek's junior officers who will march in lock-step the way Smisek orders them to walk until they get fed up and abandon their allegiance to UA.
There is no question that the goodwill of the former UA has taken a severe decline in the publics' eyes as well as in the eyes of 1K elites and particularly those elites that reached million-mile status. Why else would a class action be filed?
I say, "BRAVO" to the class action.
-
May 31, 2012, 8:55 pm
#156
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
With all due respect, I must disagree with you. There is a lot of damage to the goodwill of UA. The recent mass exodus of loyal UA 1K's to AA and to DL have put a huge dent in the current revenue of UA. Long-term loyal customers do not abandon a company that treated them well unless something serious occurred as has happened at UA. Clearly, the invasion of Smisek and his crew has damaged the good name of UA.
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
The lawsuit will cause many to focus on the way the new UA management treated its loyal elites, with callous disregard. This also negatively affects goodwill. It will cause a future potentially loyal customer not to trust the new management. This would cause a decrease in revenue resulting in further damage to UA's goodwill.
May 31, 2012, 9:36 pm
#157
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: SEA/YVR/BLI
Programs: UA "Lifetime" Gold, AS MVPG100K, OW Emerald, HH Lifetime Diamond, IC Plat, Marriott Gold, Hertz Gold
Posts: 9,490
While grandfathering to Lifetime Platinum would represent a reduction in my previous lifetime benefits, I for one would have accepted it. In response to those who have repeatedly claimed that the former Premier Executive "tracks" to the new Premier Gold, I'd point out that there are more differences than there are similarities, and definitely more similarities with Platinum.
You do raise an interesting issue though.
What I was promised was, among other benefits, the lifetime benefits of lifetime Premier Executive status, the next-to-top tier in PMUA MP.
What the CO IEs were promised, according to Randy Petersen's open letter on their behalf, was lifetime top-tier status. Notice the emphasis placed on that factor both by Randy and by Gordon Bethune, i.e. "You are correct in your understanding of what we meant to be lifetime top-tier status."
If and when this class action proceeds, and setting side the emotional aspects of "equitable", "fair," and "unfair" treatment, I wonder if there are any legal issues attached to the inconsistent treatment of these two historical groups of customers.
Could it present UA with a legal problem in court when it has reduced/changed/removed lifetime benefits formerly promised to one group of customers, the PMUA Million Mile Flyers, while at the same time it has maintained (or perhaps even enhanced?) the lifetime benefits of another group, the CO IEs, by parachuting them into a roughly appropriate classification in MP?
I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on the Internet, so I have no idea. Others may. Again, I have no interest in seeing anybody else's benefits removed - I'm pleased for the IEs for example - but I would have preferred that UA had similarly honored its promises to me.
You do raise an interesting issue though.
What I was promised was, among other benefits, the lifetime benefits of lifetime Premier Executive status, the next-to-top tier in PMUA MP.
What the CO IEs were promised, according to Randy Petersen's open letter on their behalf, was lifetime top-tier status. Notice the emphasis placed on that factor both by Randy and by Gordon Bethune, i.e. "You are correct in your understanding of what we meant to be lifetime top-tier status."
If and when this class action proceeds, and setting side the emotional aspects of "equitable", "fair," and "unfair" treatment, I wonder if there are any legal issues attached to the inconsistent treatment of these two historical groups of customers.
Could it present UA with a legal problem in court when it has reduced/changed/removed lifetime benefits formerly promised to one group of customers, the PMUA Million Mile Flyers, while at the same time it has maintained (or perhaps even enhanced?) the lifetime benefits of another group, the CO IEs, by parachuting them into a roughly appropriate classification in MP?
I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on the Internet, so I have no idea. Others may. Again, I have no interest in seeing anybody else's benefits removed - I'm pleased for the IEs for example - but I would have preferred that UA had similarly honored its promises to me.
Last edited by Fredd; May 31, 2012 at 10:56 pm
May 31, 2012, 10:07 pm
#158
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,358
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
-
When I did not hear from AA for a while, I contacted them and was told that the delay was due to an avalanche of UA customers of approximately 5,000 each day for a two-week period. That clearly indicates an unhappy UA customer. Unhappy customers who are status matching signal a decline in goodwill.
What qualifies you to determine who is irrational for relying on UA published information in order to achieve specific promised benefits of reaching million-mile status? Furthermore, many UA customers close to million-miles did exactly the same thing. If you think doing so is "absolutely irrational - behavior" you are entitled to your opinion, as shallow as it seems.
Like I said, UA brought this lawsuit on themselves. A company does not knowingly and intentionally breach written promises, with impunity.
-
Last edited by dgcpaphd; May 31, 2012 at 11:36 pm Reason: spelling
May 31, 2012, 10:55 pm
#159
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicago USA
Programs: *A Junkie, SQ PPS, Skywards Gold, 2 Million Mile Flyer;*wood LT Plat, BA MM
Posts: 1,762
A few interesting things, a colleague (sorry being vague) is an upper-level executive at Good Morning America and she told me they contacted the lawyer representing the plaintiff and the plaintiff did not want to go on the air, not on GMA or ABC Nightly News, so it seems this guy is holding his cards close to him.
I spoke to my lawyer, who knows my grievances about UA's MMiler changes (as does most of the people around me), and he told me class actions are a whole different animal. He told me the district where the filing was done is known as one of the toughest in the country so whoever decided to fight this must know what they are doing. The lawyer who filed has the highest rating a lawyer can get on some national site, whatever that means.
He also told me that I can bet American and the other airlines must be looking at this and waiting to see the outcome.
I was looking at the little booklet I got from Starwood stating I am Platinum for life and it had a little number next to the statement. On the back of the book it states "Starwood reserves the right to modify SPG benefits at any time."
This case can possibly have a huge impact on future programs and what it means when a company states "if you do 'X' than we will give you lifetime benefits a, b & c." ("fly 1,000,000 miles and get x,y,z benefits" or "stay 500 nights and be Platinum for ten years, you become Platinum for life")
It can go either way, but if a company is setting long-term goals for their customers only to switch the prize at the end (or even cancel them) - how can that be ok to do just because of a small asterisk or number at the end of "LIFETIME"?
I don't know the answer, I am not a lawyer, but this fascinates me to no end.
^^
I spoke to my lawyer, who knows my grievances about UA's MMiler changes (as does most of the people around me), and he told me class actions are a whole different animal. He told me the district where the filing was done is known as one of the toughest in the country so whoever decided to fight this must know what they are doing. The lawyer who filed has the highest rating a lawyer can get on some national site, whatever that means.
He also told me that I can bet American and the other airlines must be looking at this and waiting to see the outcome.
I was looking at the little booklet I got from Starwood stating I am Platinum for life and it had a little number next to the statement. On the back of the book it states "Starwood reserves the right to modify SPG benefits at any time."
This case can possibly have a huge impact on future programs and what it means when a company states "if you do 'X' than we will give you lifetime benefits a, b & c." ("fly 1,000,000 miles and get x,y,z benefits" or "stay 500 nights and be Platinum for ten years, you become Platinum for life")
It can go either way, but if a company is setting long-term goals for their customers only to switch the prize at the end (or even cancel them) - how can that be ok to do just because of a small asterisk or number at the end of "LIFETIME"?
I don't know the answer, I am not a lawyer, but this fascinates me to no end.
If you are unaware that customers want to trust companies with which they do business, it appears that no answer will satisfy you.
Like I said, UA brought this lawsuit on themselves. A company does not knowingly and intentionally breach written promises, with impunity.
-
Like I said, UA brought this lawsuit on themselves. A company does not knowingly and intentionally breach written promises, with impunity.
-
Last edited by iluv2fly; May 31, 2012 at 11:26 pm Reason: merge
May 31, 2012, 11:37 pm
#160
Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Programs: Marriott Titanium -> United Silver
Posts: 937
I would probably agree with you if this were any other industry besides airlines (or telecom). Relative to other airlines, I don't think there's much damage. All the US airlines treat customers like crap. I really liked Continental before the merger but it has really become a race to the bottom. For me, I can accept United as long as I find a lot of saver award availability (which is a deal-breaker with Delta). Some of the airlines are playing nice, like AA, in trying to woo United customers but it's only a matter of time before they start getting greedy too.
Jun 1, 2012, 5:57 am
#161
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: ORD, MBS
Programs: UA Plat., 1.52 MM
Posts: 2,053
As a full-time practicing lawyer, I just have to tell you how amusing it is to read all the ignorant posts by people who have no idea what the law actually provides or how the legal system really works.
You simply cannot legally tell someone specifically that they have earned two regional upgrades each year for life after earning Million Miler and then take it away that benefit after it has been earned by relying on a general provision that provides you can change the rules at any time.
But keep posting away. It's good for a few laughs.
You simply cannot legally tell someone specifically that they have earned two regional upgrades each year for life after earning Million Miler and then take it away that benefit after it has been earned by relying on a general provision that provides you can change the rules at any time.
But keep posting away. It's good for a few laughs.
Haven't read the whole thread, but...
This just about hits the nail on the head. The point of such a lawsuit is not necessarily to win a court victory, but to bring pressure on the opponent in other ways. In this case, those other ways include the publicity, the discovery process, etc. Whatever the wording of UA's small print, via its advertising and other public pronouncments it certainly has promised more than it has delivered re MM benefits and a host of other perks. More power to the litigant here for bringing these to light in various ways.
This just about hits the nail on the head. The point of such a lawsuit is not necessarily to win a court victory, but to bring pressure on the opponent in other ways. In this case, those other ways include the publicity, the discovery process, etc. Whatever the wording of UA's small print, via its advertising and other public pronouncments it certainly has promised more than it has delivered re MM benefits and a host of other perks. More power to the litigant here for bringing these to light in various ways.
I guess not too many readers remember this oldie program...
My take after 20 years of MP+ membership experience is - a promise by
XYZ dba United is just a temporary marketing intent aimed at the gullible public.
Jun 1, 2012, 6:25 am
#162
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: DEN
Programs: 2012 Plat-2013 Plat-2014 Silver-2015 GM
Posts: 818
With all due respect, your trying to pass of a subjective opinion as settled fact.
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
As I stated in that thread, those Surveys provide a better customer metric of just how well, or poorly, the company is doing and much more meaningful than anything posted on this site. Since those surveys are "managed" by an outside firm, the results cannot be hidden or denied.
Although GM's are not necessarily on this site, they do provide feedback in those surveys. I'll just bet they are getting hammered up and down the customer base. IF, like other major corporations, those survey results get shared with the BOD, and there are goods odds they will be because those are real fingers on the pulse, there could be be some "changes we all might like" in the air.
We'll see.
Jun 1, 2012, 9:03 am
#163
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Dubai / NYC
Programs: EK-IO, UA-1K2MM, ETIHAD-GOLD, SPG-PLAT LIFETIME, JUMEIRAH SERIUS GOLD
Posts: 5,220
With all due respect, your trying to pass of a subjective opinion as settled fact.
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
?
There is currently no measurable damage to UA's goodwill, its elite ranks, or revenue. While long term trends may certainly reveal something different, there are no data points outside of anonymous comments on the internet to indicate recent events have hurt UA's ability to attract and retain high yield customers.
?
Anyway, time will tell. I could be wrong but the people posting about all this lost business could be wrong as well. WE only know what we have done with our own business. The numbers need to come out down the road to see if any real damage was done
Jun 1, 2012, 9:04 am
#164
Suspended
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SEA
Posts: 12,485
You are partially correct. I made my assessment based on the financial statements of the first quarter which is insufficient to support a trend. I also considered the recent "sale" by UA of miles at a 40% discount. This can only mean that UA is hurting for cash. Moreover, the cash flow statement of the first quarter indicates a severe drop in cash. These factors signal that there is a reduction in ticket sales despite a longer lag time in paying the largest expense (fuel). Of course, other factors exist but the bad press also has to have a negative affect on UA's goodwill.
You're entitled to an opinion, but distorting facts to prove your point is not appropriate.
Not so. The recent status matches of AA and DL revealed a bottleneck delay in those airlines completing an overwhelming response from UA elites.
When I did not hear from AA for a while, I contacted them and was told that the delay was due to an avalanche of UA customers of approximately 5,000 each day for a two-week period. That clearly indicates an unhappy UA customer. Unhappy customers who are status matching signal a decline in goodwill.
When I did not hear from AA for a while, I contacted them and was told that the delay was due to an avalanche of UA customers of approximately 5,000 each day for a two-week period. That clearly indicates an unhappy UA customer. Unhappy customers who are status matching signal a decline in goodwill.
What qualifies you to determine who is irrational for relying on UA published information in order to achieve specific promised benefits of reaching million-mile status? Furthermore, many UA customers close to million-miles did exactly the same thing. If you think doing so is "absolutely irrational - behavior" you are entitled to your opinion, as shallow as it seems.
I trust that UA and other airlines are maintaining and operating their aircraft in a manner that prioritizes safety and reliability. Beyond the contract of carriage, the airline has promised me nothing and I am not naive enough to trust that management is going to consider my other whims and demands.
Jun 1, 2012, 9:31 am
#165
Join Date: Feb 2005
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Platinum Elite; UA MM
Posts: 325
A company that entices people to spend money for lifetime benefits and then tries to take away part of the benefit lacks integrity as far as I'm concerned. A company that lets this PR fiasco go on and on without addressing it directly is beyond stupid. And for all this mismanagement the Board rewards the CEO with millions of dollars. Unbelievable.
But to lighten up the discussion, Ms. Management would make a great drag name. And depending on who plays the character that could be the change I would like.
