spin88

Not sure where you got your figures from, the 787 is 18' MAX in cabin width, the 777 is 19'3"

so its 15" difference

MaximusDamon

It's not about how you feel or how I feel. What I'm saying is this is the way UNITED defined their best customers; into MP tiers. Their determination is made based on miles flown with bonuses for higher fare buckets. If they want to change that definition, then they should do that. But until or unless they do, best customers are defined by how many miles you fly (with a little bit of revenue math based on bonuses) not on the pure quality of your revenue (except GS apparently).

It's therefore ridiculous to make elites feel like scum as many in this forum are doing. If UA loses a lot of it's elites it will definitely start hurting and would have to massively cut capacity to adapt. UA cannot be a huge airline with lots of flights to everywhere without also having lots of elites to help fill seats. I think that's the point someone earlier in the replies was saying about not being able to have their cake and eat it too.

tom911

I'm not drowning. 100% on domestic upgrades this year on AA plus I've cleared 8 systemwides, all without a buy-up. I've also traveled in Cathay F on an award ticket with a wide range of dates available, as well as AA F to the Olympics (3 tickets). What am I missing? I have to tell you I'm pretty happy there since I completely walked away from UA after they devalued 1MM. Still have some miles left to burn, though.

chinatraderjmr

Perhaps a few people on FT are some of UA's best customers but the majority are not. UA's "best" customers buy C or F fares, don't travel often & don't require any extras.

BEST CUSTOMERS DON'T
- know all the tricks on how to get compensated
- only fly in C or F when they are upgraded
- complain endlessly to CR
- look for ways to purposely get bumped
- only buy the cheapest fares
- have "secret" tricks to use less miles for awards
- fly the longest routes psbl just for the sake of flying in awards
- etc, etc, etc

***there is nothing wrong with doing much of the above but those of us that do should not expect to be considered a "best customer" in any way, shape or form

I generally fly 3 airlines. I have the most miles w UA but since I have not bought a full F tkt with them in a few years & now only use my upgrades, there is no way I am one of UA's "best customers" (even with 150K bis miles a year). Also add the amnt of times I've complained, got compensated, etc.

HOWEVER, on the other hand I fly SQ & EK just as often and ALWAYS in F or A class (not even C). I would argue that with those airlines I am one of their "best customers" (also taking into account I don't ever complain, get compensated, etc

- SQ has a very straight forward way of knowing who theire best customers are. They have PPS which you get after spending $25K only in F or C class in a year
- EK just sent me my I/O card. I have not figured out what the qualifications are & how I got it but do know there are only 200 of us system wide
- UA has GS but they keep sliding the scale on that. It's no longer that hard to get & the rules keep changing

It's a shame as 10 years ago I would have argued I was easily one of UA's "best customers" flying international 2-4 times a month always in F or A class but UA 10 years ago is not UA today

garykung

If these are the criteria, I highly doubt anyone of us here will be at all

Bear96

And of course, the largest company on the planet in a given industry is not an "industry leader" in your book, right?

Can you cite the language you are referring to in the UA CoC or MP rules (or wherever it may be) that create this "entitlement" to "undiluted" upgrades? And how is "undiluted" defined?

I disagree that these fancy titles created by the marketing department can be used to establish who the "best customers" are.

I would think someone flying full-fare F twice a year between the U.S. and Europe or Asia is a better customer than someone who frequently but only flies deeply discounted Y, and if the fare is "too expensive" decides not to go (and if he does go, starts an inidgnant thread on FT about how terrible UA is if he does not get a complimentary upgrade, and if he does get the upgrade posts about how terrible UA F is and how no one in their right mind would ever pay for it).

The latter may be a 1K and the former may not even have any status, but I would think the former is the better customer.

tuolumne

+1

Please keep up with these extremely well written posts -, some of the best I've personally seen on FT.

chinatraderjmr

Not that there is anything wrong with doing most of those things. Many of us do But at least we need to come to terms w reality. Reality is that UA believes now they are better off without us. IMO that's a dumb move in UA's part but there are 1K's out there that UA will lose money with. Unfortunatly, UA sees that now as the rule instead of the exception to the rule which it really is

sbm12

I don't think that UA sees that as the rule. But I think that it is a fine line they (and we) are treading to find the balance of what is too much in either direction.

chinatraderjmr

With the courts the way they are, stranger things have happened But your 100% correct. UA not only has the right but the RESPONSIBILITY to try to sell as many C or F seats as it can & if that means there are fewer upgrades available, then mgmnt is doing a good job. Don't misunderstand me as I think UA's mgmnt is so misguided right now that it almost defies logic. But EVERY airline exec should make it a priority to get as much $$ as they can for their premium seats & the less upgrades the better from a business point of view.

Very true. BOTH groups need to tread very carefully

PV_Premier

You can't fairly compare being a "good customer" on UA to being a "good customer" on EK/SQ by these metrics...SQ and EK don't give reasons to complain or be compensated very often, because they are well-run businesses with excellent customer service...quite the polar opposite of UA's domestic and now arguably their international service as well. its like comparing apples to oranges, IMO.

is it really the responsibility of the customer to "tread carefully" when a business has (arguably) self destructive practices that are easily taken advantage of for the customer's benefit? this is a capitalistic society -- not a socialist republic (yet). what's good for UA isn't necessarily always good for me, and if they give me the opportunity to take advantage of their systems because, for instance, of the way their IT infrastructure is designed -- am i as a consumer expected to ignore that and not use it to my advantage? i would argue it's the responsibility of the business to close those loopholes if they don't like it -- which it seems they are now doing in at least one well advertised case and also a couple of less well advertised ones.

oopsz

I don't know if I was as a good customer to UA. All I know is that AA treats me like I am. So I now purchase my paid premium and last minute coach fares with them.

I pay qualify on segments. These aren't transcons here.

Often1

Not correct. By the terms of MP, the miles have no value, are UA's property, may be taken away and the program altered on no notice. Those are the contractual terms which any member of MP agreed to when they signed up. End of story.

The term "elite" is marketing hype concocted by marketing cookies who -- apparently correctly -- figured out that you can make people feel better about themselves if you give them a shiny plastic card and tell them they're special.

What many on FT forget is that the "customer" UA wants, isn't any particular individual (although all carriers do value those who really spend at the top end), but the large company which enters an agreement to throw UA some or all of its business in return for a discount.

For the rest, yeah, UA needs you, but not that much. For every angry UA "elite" there's somebody at DL saying roughly the same thing and headed UA's way.

entropy

that's not true sbm, they offer mileage upgrades (so does SQ)..

http://www.emirates.com/us/english/S...l_rewards.aspx

It also isn't true that a customer buying a $300 transcon connecting thru IAH isn't valuable to the carrier. The difference between profit and loss on individual flights is small, $75 per segment could be the marginal difference between profit and loss. The business traveler on that 7A SFO-IAH flight is going to go anyways, he might not care about the price, or the difference between 50 and 75% bonus miles. The marginal traveler may care more about perks than scheduling, so they may choose the $300 UA connection over a $250 B6 nonstop. It is certainly disingenuous to state that people who fill UA's seats with marginal revenue are not valuable (* however, that doesn't apply to people who earn status flying mistake fares all year.....)

chinatraderjmr

Actually, EK makes it very easy to upgrade using miles (they don't offer upgrade certs to elites). The transparency is excellent from what I can tell (I've never used an upgrade for myself on EK) All thru the booking process or on Skywards.com you can easily see what flights will confirm upgrades at time of booking. SQ on the other hand does not make it easy to upgrade even for its own Elites although it is psbl. (I'm Elite with both carriers and have sponsored upgrades for others, successfully on EK but not on SQ). That's why it's very common to be the only passenger in F on an SQ flight but EK fills up their F cabin (granted, with mostly full F passengers as opposed to UA who rarely gets full F int pax that don't at least have corp discounts)